Domain forum moves site after Verizon gets subpoena for user data

[snoopy]

""Documents to be produced.....7. ALL documents reflecting any identifying information for each member or participant on the webiste or messageboard...""

......................

"# Disclaimers: TMfor.com is not and was not affiliated, associated, connected or in any relation in any way with Pair networks.
# Pair networks informed us about this subpoena on advice of their consulting lawyer (which was the right thing to do imho).
# There were never done anything illegal on TMfor.com
# TMfor.com was never associated in any way with Navigation Catalyst or Basic Fusion, no person associated with these companies was even a member of TMfor.com "

http://www.tmfor.com/

[jmcc]

Originally posted by snoopy
[B]""Documents to be produced.....7. ALL documents reflecting any identifying information for each member or participant on the webiste or messageboard...""

So what's the background on the case? TM infringement?

Regards...jmcc

[ILikeInfo]

I guess I've been added to the list of IP's to be provided since I clicked on the above link.

[ILikeInfo]

Originally posted by jmcc
So what's the background on the case? TM infringement?

Regards...jmcc

http://www.domainstate.com/showthrea...threadid=89438

[atlas]

Looks like they've moved to:
http://bonkerstwo.com/

[GeorgeK]

Since David Steele represents other TM clients, it'll be interesting to see whether they uncover information on non-Verizon TM-infringement, and whether it can be used in other cases. If they post the documents (board messages) in the docket, that'll be the biggest appendix ever --- great source material for David Kesmodel's next book, too.

[jmcc]

Originally posted by ILikeInfo
http://www.domainstate.com/showthrea...threadid=89438

Thanks ILikeInfo.
Just looking at some of the domains on that list. It looks like tasting might be over but there are a lot of unsettled scores.

Regards...jmcc

[Domo Sapiens]

http://domainstate.com/showthread.ph...m&pagenumber=1

[GeorgeK]

Originally posted by jmcc
Thanks ILikeInfo.
Just looking at some of the domains on that list. It looks like tasting might be over but there are a lot of unsettled scores.

Regards...jmcc

The statutory damages would be worth fighting for economically, given the relatively high probability of victory. It would be rational to hold out for a big payday.

[jmcc]

Originally posted by GeorgeK
The statutory damages would be worth fighting for economically, given the relatively high probability of victory. It would be rational to hold out for a big payday.

Yes but what about enforcement? It could get messy trying to track down the funds especially if they've been moved out of the jurisdiction. However if does result in a victory then other taster operations will definitely be in the firing line.

Regards...jmcc

[subg]

Go to archive .org and look at the name of the forum when it first started:

http://web.archive.org/web/200612050...p://tmfor.com/

Then later their moniker was traffic monetization forum:

http://web.archive.org/web/200708200...www.tmfor.com/

But too late, they weren't smart enough to block the archive spider.

Archive did miss the first few weeks thought when it was called trade mark forum.

[ILikeInfo]

I'm curious to see how far they get with turning over the wildcarding records - This cuts both ways and the wildcarding is really being ignored byt those affected.

[Domo Sapiens]

Originally posted by subg
Go to archive .org and look at the name of the forum when it first started:



moniker was traffic monetization forum:

http://web.archive.org/web/200708200...www.tmfor.com/

.

oops.

[GeorgeK]

Originally posted by jmcc
Yes but what about enforcement? It could get messy trying to track down the funds especially if they've been moved out of the jurisdiction. However if does result in a victory then other taster operations will definitely be in the firing line.

Navigation Catalyst Systems is in the USA, and easy to reach.

[Domo Sapiens]

foresight

http://domainstate.com/showthread.ph...threadid=53190

No mugshots will be required for domainstatesmen.