I don't need to prove anything to you little guy. If you're not interested, 
delete the message and move on. This is the biz list. I have domains I thought 
others may be interested in; the last place I'd post infringing work is on the 
owner's list and I don't compete with Digium.

----- Original Message ----
From: Matthew Rubenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Justin Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Asterisk -Biz <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 6, 2008 9:09:47 PM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Bunch of asterisk-related domains for sale

    I got a clue, from you comments on this list. You're marketing
"asterisk-related" domains to sell products and services at least some
of which competing with Digium, at least some of which have the
trademarked "asterisk" in the domain name.

    I could be wrong, but the strongest clue has been your cageyness in not
just posting their names in your ad - the strongest sell with the least
effort. So why don't you prove me wrong by posting all of them? In which
case you're just overselling a product with unnecessary mystery at
unnecessary effort.


On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 20:13 -0800, Justin Newman wrote:
> Get a clue. I hope you don't practice law. 18 USC Sec. 1051 etc. was meant to 
> help folks identify the mark holder and it's source. Digium would have an 
> up-hill battle trying to get me on rights for "sipdid.com". 
> 
> The only thing clear from your e-mail is that you lack information to pass 
> judgement. I said "asterisk-related". Does "recordacall.com" infringe upon 
> Digium's marks? However, that to me is "asterisk-related", as it may be of 
> interest to companies which do business with Asterisk or similar platforms. I 
> have a bunch of them.
> 
> Under the Lanham Act, the so called trademark owner still has the burden of 
> proof. Also, the word "asterisk" is widely used in technology, software, and 
> on the Internet. We all know that any idiot can sue the same. That doesn't 
> mean they will win or that they would even want the bad press.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Matthew Rubenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Justin Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Asterisk -Biz <[email protected]>
> Sent: Sunday, January 6, 2008 6:24:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Bunch of asterisk-related domains for sale
> 
>    You're pitching domains that are "asterisk related", which, as nothing
> but names, means they have the word "asterisk" in them. You're pitching
> them to people on the "asterisk-biz" list, "Commercial and
> Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion". Your offerings clearly infringe
> the Digium trademark on "Asterisk" used to identify Digium's "Asterisk"
> product.
> 
>    Under the Lanham Act, which your copy/paste operation evidently failed
> to fully parse, if a mark holder fails to "vigorously pursue" action
> against an infringer who's diluting the mark as used under the held
> trademark, the original mark holder can lose claim to exclusive use of
> the mark.
> 
>    Understanding trademark requires more than hitting Wikipedia. But then
> you might not have registered those domains intending to make money
> infringing someone's trademark.
> 
> 
>      
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
-- 

(C) Matthew Rubenstein


      
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 


_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--

asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz

Reply via email to