Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

UN agency gives 20th Century Fox web address to 'The Simpsons Movie'
Yahoo! Canada ^ | Jul 25, 2007

Posted on 07/25/2007 8:30:15 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer

Woo-hoo! "The Simpsons Movie" has won its name back on the Internet.

A UN agency has ruled that ownership of the domain name thesimpsonsmovie.com must be handed to News Corp.'s Twentieth Century Fox, which owns the rights to the film and the popular TV series.

Twentieth Century Fox complained to the World Intellectual Property Organization over the use of the film's name in the Internet address of a site registered by Keith Malley of New York.

Fox lawyers claimed Malley was using the address to divert Internet users to a website that included sexually explicit depictions of several characters from "The Simpsons" and, later, to his "Keith and the Girl" website. He was demanding a $50,000 fee from Twentieth Century Fox for the domain name, according to the July 22 ruling of the WIPO arbitration panel.

It found that Malley "has no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the domain name" and ordered its immediate return.

In an interview, Malley said that Fox lawyers never contacted him and that he learned about the case after the deadline had passed. He said his contact information was available on his website and through his lawyer, although he hadn't updated the official registration records for the domain name, which he bought in 1999.

"I found it bullying," Malley said, adding that he would speak with his lawyer about challenging the decision. Malley could appeal by filing a lawsuit in a court.

The arbitration system, which was set up in 1999, allows those who think they have the right to a domain to gain control of it without having to fight a costly legal battle or pay large sums of money. Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman and Madonna are among the Hollywood stars who have previously won rulings against so-called "cybersquatters."

"The animated television series 'The Simpsons' debuted in 1989, and has become one of the longest-running network series in television history," the ruling said, noting that Friday's release of the film has generated huge public interest on the Internet.

WIPO said Malley's "aim in registering the disputed domain name was to profit from and exploit" Twentieth Century Fox's trademark to promote and sell his own products and merchandise.

Malley, 33, who produces an Internet radio show, said he obtained the domain name with intentions of creating a parody of "The Simpsons." He said the amount Fox offered for the domain name, $300, wouldn't cover time spent developing ideas for the site; he would not elaborate on those ideas.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 1stamendment; abuseofpower; doh; freespeech; internationallaw; internet; internetporn; mmmmdonuts; pornography; pr0n; sovereignty; thesimpsons; thirdsector; un
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 521-540541-560561-580581-583 next last
To: squatterssuck
Fox had taken the route to sue for the name and damages
in US courts and not relying on an international tribunal that promotes the globalist notion that American citizens are beholden to foreign interests, no one would have blinked an eye.
541 posted on 08/24/2007 8:46:48 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer (I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 540 | View Replies]

To: squatterssuck
You know the sad thing is, how many Americans are selling out to anti-American internationalist institutions.
542 posted on 08/24/2007 8:49:43 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer (I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 540 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot; hedgetrimmer
Funny story: yesterday I met a very attractive South Korean girl (actually, at the age of 26 she isn't a "girl" any longer, but at my age she is). I asked her what brought her to Chicago and she replied, "I'm just visiting some friends while on my way to a U.N. conference in New York."

"Really? Do you work for the U.N.?"
"No. I work for a NGO."
"Which one?" [If she had said WIPO I would've fallen-over right there].

She named one that I have never heard of . . . the funny thing is that the moment she said NGO I thought of hedgetrimmer.

Do you think it's possible that hedge and I are meant to be together?

543 posted on 08/24/2007 9:31:32 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Do you think it's possible that hedge and I are meant to be together?

Thanks, I didn't feel like eating lunch today.

When you get a chance, check out your Freepmail.

544 posted on 08/24/2007 9:33:53 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 543 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

I still haven’t opened my FRmail since before Grizzled Bear (what was that, comment #100 or something?) sent me that nastygram. I’ll get to it some time later.


545 posted on 08/24/2007 9:37:55 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Ok, so let me ask you this. If it were an American company going up against someone who registered the name in China how would you expect that to be handled?


546 posted on 08/24/2007 9:39:19 AM PDT by squatterssuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 542 | View Replies]

To: squatterssuck
If it were an American company going up against someone who registered the name in China how would you expect that to be handled?

Let's see. The American company would kowtow to the Chinese communists and beg for an opportunity to do business with their country and their billion citizens. They'd consider the registration part of the cost of doing business (apart from giving the chicoms a 50% interest in any companies they build there). LOL
547 posted on 08/24/2007 9:56:32 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer (I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 546 | View Replies]

To: squatterssuck

You’ll never get a straight answer.


548 posted on 08/24/2007 10:32:45 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 546 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Hedgetrimmer, you danced around that question so nicely you should be a politician! lol

Seriously, what would YOUR solution be to the problem? People get ripped off all the time by going to websites that abuse a brand they don’t own. From the phishing issues with banks to counterfeit goods to the corporations being ripped off because the site with their name in it is directing people to their competitors sites. In all seriousness what would be your idea to fix this situation?


549 posted on 08/24/2007 10:46:32 AM PDT by squatterssuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 547 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
You’ll never get a straight answer.

That WAS a straight answer. It is exactly what companies are doing over there. How else can you explain why microsoft os software is hundreds of dollars in price here, but 3 dollars in China?
550 posted on 08/24/2007 11:09:14 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer (I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 548 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
No it WAS NOT a straight answer. The question was, what would you, as an American, do if someone from China violated your property rights in such a fashion? I believe I asked you (or someone else who tapdances) this question on this thread weeks ago.
551 posted on 08/24/2007 11:14:11 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Never bought a product in China. I don’t even buy Chinese products in the U.S., and I haven’t since Tiananmen. When was that, 1989?


552 posted on 08/24/2007 11:16:34 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
You know the sad thing is, how many Americans are selling out to anti-American internationalist institutions.

And how cheaply they are bought.
553 posted on 08/24/2007 11:19:19 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 542 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
Updated list of answers to my question #20, for those of you keeping score out there in FReeperland--how does the X family enforce its U.S. injunction against Larry? (with the "tilt" indicated in parentheses):

1. shoot the bastard (isolationist),
2. ignore him (isolationist),
3. have Belarus enforce the injunction (globalist), and
4. pre-emptively register the offending domain name in every nation on Earth (isolationist).

554 posted on 08/24/2007 11:20:31 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Never bought a product in China. I don’t even buy Chinese products in the U.S., and I haven’t since Tiananmen.

That's not quite true. I plan to eat at China Buffet today, as its Friday menu is excellent and I'm hungry.

555 posted on 08/24/2007 11:35:22 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Yes it was. It is the same answer as why China gets Microsoft OS for $3 and US citizens in America pay hundreds of dollars.


556 posted on 08/24/2007 11:41:09 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer (I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Ok, you’re not getting my question apparently. Let’s phrase it differently. What system would you personally like to see put in place to protect internet users in generally from being duped by fake websites? If say a squatter in the UK registered a website with a name that belongs to a US bank and directed people there with the sole intent to steal their information, what system would you have in place to correct that? Or would you just they have every right to dupe people and steal their identity?


557 posted on 08/24/2007 11:59:47 AM PDT by squatterssuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 556 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Shouldn’t that be the XXX family given their proclivity for using naked children in their products?


558 posted on 08/24/2007 12:35:53 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer (I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 554 | View Replies]

To: squatterssuck

I wonder what happened in the good old days, when a person from the UK sent a letter to an American citizen on forged bank letter head with the sole intent of stealing something from them?


559 posted on 08/24/2007 1:00:37 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer (I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 557 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

They left the banking for the internet and the letters for the Canadian lottery.


560 posted on 08/24/2007 3:05:46 PM PDT by squatterssuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 559 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 521-540541-560561-580581-583 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson