FC: 2600 wins against Ford, federal judge denies injunction

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Sat Dec 22 2001 - 10:09:55 PST

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Microsoft asks for 4-mo delay before antitrust punishments levied"

    Official PDF file of order:
    http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/_opinions/Clelandpdf/RHC01-71685.PDF
    
    HTML version:
    http://cryptome.org/ford-v-2600.htm
    
    ---
    
    Background:
    
    "2600 plans hacker-caravan to courtroom showdown with Ford"
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-02015.html
    
    "Ford sues 2600 Magazine over fuckgeneralmotors.com"
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-01956.html
    
    ---
    
    
       
                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                  FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
                            SOUTHERN DIVISION
    _________________________________________________________________
    
    FORD MOTOR COMPANY,
    
              Plaintiff,
    
    v.                                      Case No. 01-CV-71685-DT
    
    2600 ENTERPRISES, et al.,
    
              Defendants.
    _______________________________/
    
    
      ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S "MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION"
    
    The essential facts in this case are undisputed. Defendants
    2600 Enterprises and Eric Corley, a/k/a Emmanuel Goldstein,1 are
    the registrants of the domain name "fuckgeneralmotors.com." When
    an Internet user enters this domain into a web browser, he is
    automatically linked to the official website of Plaintiff Ford
    Motor Company ("Ford"), which is located at "ford.com".2
    Defendant Corley, a self-proclaimed "artist and social critic,"
    apparently considers this piece of so-called cyber-art one of his
    most humorous. Ford is not amused. Hence, the instant complaint
    alleging three Lanham Act volations: trademark dilution, 15
    U.S.C. § 1125(c); trademark infringement, 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1);
    and unfair competition, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). The matter is now
    before the court on Ford's "Motion for Preliminary Injunction,"
    filed on April 18, 2001. For the reasons set forth below, the
    court will deny Ford's motion.
    
    [...]
    
                       III. CONCLUSION
    
    For the reasons set forth above, while Plaintiff
    understandably may be disturbed by Defendants' acts, the Lanham
    Act provides no remedy. Having failed to demonstrate any
    likelihood of succeeding on the merits of its claim, Plaintiff is
    not entitled to an injunction. Accordingly,
    
    IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's "Motion for Preliminary
    Injunction" is DENIED.
    
    [...]
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Dec 22 2001 - 10:46:58 PST