NameMedia dba BuyDomains 'cybersquatted my domains
while I was incompetent due to a severe TBI. I alerted them to my prior
use and they asked that I submit a bid greater than 2,600 on Eartheye.com
because they saw the TM had not been
registered.
They ran ads on Eartheye.com for five years until
they sold the domain in a blatant TM violation. They have run ads on
SleepSpot.com for six years and are running them now. I used SleepSpot to
serve hospitality reservation software. There was a history of it
available on the Internet Archive until July
or Sept of this year when they disabled the IA spider with a robots text
file. I am extremely angry and have filed a Trademark Infringement Lawsuit
in US Court 5:2009cv05151.
I am seeking in excess of ten million dollars. I realize that seems
excessive to many, but its only around one-sixth of one year's annual profit for
a violation that spanned six years or about two
percent of their profits for the times covered. They also
intentionally created these emotional
distress
after being advised.
I plan to add Google to the suit or the next due
to these TM issues when I find during discovery that Google paid NameMedia for
ads to be run on either the
sites since 2003. I think we can
assume that Google will be added in some
way. I am extremely angry and will seek that Google be required to
perform a registration verification that requires a domain ad account to be the
original registrar of the domain. That could be done automatically and
instantly and a domain advertiser who is not the original registrar should be
prevented from using a prior TM without demonstrating a license to use the TM
and certifying that it is not a 'cybersquatted ad site'.
I am not sure of the damages I will seek,
however, I know without a doubt that Google is aware that they make thousands
each day while running ads on domain 'cybersquatters', as the system is
now. You say that you are not in a position to arbitrate TM issues and use
that as the excuse to mitigate a harmful action
you encourage. You are in a position of profiting from these encouraged violations and I believe a jury will agree.
They will also agree that Google encourages 'cybersquatters' as a pattern of
business because of the income it produces.
In my next lawsuit, I will seek to end ALL
Google parked domain ads. There
should be no comparison between a "domain-portfolio" and a portfolio of
billboards. Domains are intellectual properties only. A domain that
is parked is nearly always 'cybersquatted'. Google is regularly conspiring
with cybersquatters. A parked domain should never be allowed to run
ads. Google is aware that a parked domain is nothing but an ad site and calling them editorial content.
Allowing them is a demonstration of an intent to profit by sites and conspiring
to deceive regular search users. With
SleepSpot.com and other sites
NameMedia Inc. tries to manipulate the Google search. Google knows
the site has been a parked ad site for the last six years. Google and
NameMedia are co-conspiring to deceive those searching for content and not
searching for an ad site. Google ads are currently running on the domain
so Google will be involved now for sure. I just checked SleepSpot and clicked a
few ads to help give me standing or grounds.
The content network should have a parked site
exemption! It will after my lawsuit for sure. I may have paid for
ads at sites like sleepspot or ad sites run by NameMedia Inc.
This complaint is not a threat. This is simply an
attempt to resolve this TM and deceptive ad content policy issue out of court. You may
respond by email. I will send this in email and post it on my BLOG
today.
Google is in
a unique position to resolve this amicably without requiring a legal
action. Create a parked site exclusion that is selected by default and
cease and desist conspiring with NameMedia Inc. at sleepspot.com to profit
from a TM violation that is involved in a current US Federal Lawsuit.
Follow it online. Neeley v. NameMedia, Inc. -
5:2009cv05151
I realize that someone read this and the IP resolved to La Jolla, CA? I have seen online in the Google AdSense Support forum that this email address is usually ignored and snail mail is preferred.
That seems to fly in the face of reason for an Internet company to ignore email complaints. I read very much of the motions that are online in the Vulcan Golf Case No. 07CV3371. I read in your AdSense policies that, "domains submitted for the AdSense for domains program may not violate any trademark (and related rights), copyright, trade secret, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party", and then I see that you go on to say, " domains may not be involved in litigation or under dispute". Excuse me but eartheye.com and sleepspot.com are each named in a US Western District of AR Court Case No. 5:2009cv05151. The prior notice had it linked. Google AdSense will be added along with Network Solutions when I figure out how to do it.There is nothing that Google AdSense can do now besides halting the ad serving on the domain sleepspot to cease conspiring with NameMedia Inc. to inflict damages. This will only keep the intentional emotional distress infliction from resolving to co-conspirator Google. The domains were abused by NameMedia Inc. for six years and I will seek to recover all monies paid to NameMedia Inc. on each of them. I will also use Google's encouragement of AdSense websites to create the conspiratorial link. I will seek all Google's AdSense profit for the two domains. I will seek to recover for the unjust enrichment due to the fraudulent act AdSense conspired in.I agree that Google currently has no duty to determine the validity of a domain before accepting it in AdSense. Your TM policy will suffice for most ad sites. However, Google AdSense should require a domain owner who is not the original domain owner to disclose that fact and state that it has never been used as anything but an ad site. Use only as an ad site does not risk any use of the mark in trade or TM.I am sure that Google AdSense will pay Vulcan Golf LLC. at the close of the suit. The amount may be lower than the requested million, but I wager that Google AdSense will pay a lot. The typo that was registered should have been obvious and any reasonable juror will quickly agree. The allegedly ugly error page could have been income for Microsoft and I bet Google knows that. A plug-in that detects a parked page and instead runs ads based on the desired URL?Interesting idea I thought so I googled it. "Microsoft's decision to replace error pages with its own search tools has so far drawn a muted response from competitors. Representatives at Yahoo and AltaVista both declined to comment on the move, while Google did not return phone calls Tuesday." Google ignore a CNET call. No Way! Google's "AdSense for domains" is Google's "muted" answer. I do not use Explorer so I have no idea if Google "licensing" parked pages is similar, but it gets past AdBlockerPlus on FF 3,Google is in an interesting situation with me. Google conspired with NameMedia to infringe on my trademark by not checking that the domain ownership had not recently changed and not asking NameMedia to report a domain non-origination. This was a grossly negligent failure. Google also profited when I paid for ads clicked while run on NameMedia's pages.This is not a request. It is a friendly demand! Please advise me of the address for your registered agent for accepting service via registered mail.