I'm glad to see you received a ruling in your favor. Similiar to message 539 (Judah Jacobs), the fellow you filed the complaint (Corry Hong) is one of those folks that has to own all he "thinks" is his.

Those developers he spoke of in Costa Mesa (last I heard), have been let go. Mostly due to Corry's need to cut costs, I'm sure. He's attempting to build himself a "Little Computer Associates" over there. You know how they work. Buy software company out, fire the developers, rake in as much cash as you can from the maintenance.

There's another little software company, down in Orange, California (Van.....), who has gained a couple of developers that they lost. This fellow down in Orange isn't any better, as he too, likes to file frivolous lawsuits. Difference is, this guy has the bucks to do just that.

And why are you using a .org domain when you are definitely trying to make money? You wouldn't be attempting to mislead anyone into thinking you're a non-profit, now, would you?

Long time no talk. Got here by accidentally punching up an old bookmark and thought I'd pitch in.

Here's the weird part -- in about 90 minutes, I'm getting in my car to go see John Hiatt perform.

Congratulations again. I knew you were in good hands when Jim Tyre joined your case.

I'm here because I want to cite your victory in our briefs in the Pavlovich DeCSS case in California Supreme Court.

You not only won, but if the Supreme Court is wise, you're case will also help others from being dragged wrongfully into a far away court.

Cindy

We hope the site will be useful to people who find themselves in situations like Chip's. Within the Trademark and Domain Names topic area, for example, we include references on the federal Anticybersquatting law, ICANN's UDRP process, and documenting your domain defense. http://www.chillingeffects.org/trademark/

I see that each of the last two posts make mention of http://www.chillingeffects.org/ - a new project run by EFF, Harvard's Berkman Center and several prominent law school clinics.

The Chilling Effects Clearinghouse is new, they're still developing their database, but if you should find yourself in a situation similar to Chip's, I would encourage you to visit the site, get some good basic information. If you've received a Cease and Desist letter, you might wish to submit it to them for inclusion in their database. It's a good project, but their success depends as much on you as on them.

http://www.2600.com/news/122201-files/ford-dec.html

http://www.2600.com/news/display.shtml?id=915

I have not been sued but I certainly have wasted a great deal of time with people trying to do ridiculous things.

Why is it that people who do not understand copyright, fair use, etc are such a pain. Perhaps bullying has been a successful strategy for them.

Once again, well done for standing up, you are saving a lot of other people from the same agony.

Maybe even more importantly, we've put companies on notice that small domain-holders are willing to stand up against predatory domain-stealing tactics.

The Rest of the Internet Community:

In a unanimous decision, a panel of federal judges from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said last Friday that terriwelles.com could feature the term "Playmate of the Year" because it did not infringe upon the trademarks of Playboy Enterprises (PEI).

Trademarks owned by IBM

This is a current listing of United States trademarks owned by IBM.

Not all common law marks used by IBM are listed on this page. Because of the large number of products marketed by IBM, IBM's practice is to list only the most important of its common law marks. Failure of a mark to appear on this page does not mean that IBM does not use the mark nor does it mean that the product is not actively marketed or is not significant within its relevant market.

Now here is Unicom Systems website copy:

Trademarks This is a current listing of United States trademarks owned by UNICOM Systems, Inc.

Not all common law marks used by UNICOM Systems, Inc. are listed on this page. Because of the large number of products marketed by UNICOM, UNICOM’s practice is to list only the most important of its common law marks. Failure of a mark to appear on this page does not mean that IBM does not use the mark nor does it mean that the product is not actively marketed or is not significant within its relevant market.

http://www.ibm.com/legal/copytrade.shtml

South Africa, we started talking, we changed, it IS amazing!

AND know what? We're still talking! Sports! Braai's! Movies!

Oh, wait, that wasn't PC...

So I guess you won't be needing that url I created for you. ;-)