Verizon has sued Navigation Catalyst Systems:

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/cou...ase_id-413394/

I've not downloaded the statement of claim yet, but if someone does, please post a link to it (no need for folks to pay the PACER fees more than once).

What are these companies:

Navigation Catalyst Systems, Inc. and Basic Fusion, Inc.

What kind of domains they own?

http://www.navigationcatalyst.com/about/about.php

They own a lot of typo domains, that were figured out by using the new.net plugin.

They are in California.

I was told Basic fusion is a GoDaddy reseller account they own.

They are pretty much screwed. They own tons of hard core TM's. These days you can't do that in the US. Not good press for avoiding the Snow bill.

I took a few minutes to download the docket in this case, and posted the relevant materials at:

http://www.loffs.org/verizon-v-navcatsys-et-al/

Exhibit 7 is pretty amazing.

wow - and people wonder why the powers that be are gunning for domainers.

Does anyone know how many domains Navigation Catalyst Systems owns in total? I would think they are one of the largest domain name registrants in the world.

Originally posted by GeorgeK
I took a few minutes to download the docket in this case, and posted the relevant materials at:

http://www.loffs.org/verizon-v-navcatsys-et-al/

Exhibit 7 is pretty amazing.

there is so much crap in there it's unbelievable. Notice no microsoft domains though

Originally posted by subg
I was told Basic fusion is a GoDaddy reseller account they own.

Paragraph 8 of the complaint alleges that Basic Fusion is an ICANN-accredited registrar, and this appears to be true given they appear at:

http://www.internic.net/registrars/registrar-813.html

Registrar Contact Information

Basic Fusion, Inc.
2101 Rosecrans Avenue Suite 2000 El Segundo, California 90245
United States
1-310-647-6000
info@basicfusion.com

Although the WHOIS for basicfusion.com currently shows a NYC address:

http://whois.domaintools.com/basicfusion.com

and the IP address that the website is hosted on is 216.108.243.26, owned by Vendare Media Group, which appears to have renamed itself to Connexus:

http://www.vendaregroup.com/
http://www.connexuscorp.com/

Some of Navigation Catalyst's generic domains can be seen at:

http://www.firstlook.com/domain-portfolio

Our large portfolio of highly targeted domains reaches over 60 million users each month, connecting them with relevant information and providers. All of the traffic to our properties is organic; the vast majority coming from users bypassing a search engine and typing the URL directly into the address bar.

With that much traffic, that's a lot of potential $$$$ that Verizon can go after if they are successful in their lawsuit.

All the examples I checked used *.dnsnameserver.org nameservers, which according to www.dailychanges.com has 965,861 domains using those nameservers. It's unclear how many of those names are owned by Navigation Catalyst Systems, though, since they apparently offer domain parking to others:

http://www.firstlook.com/domain-parking

Thanks George.

Exhibit 7 is amazing.

Seems everyone else at their level has been cleaning up for the past year. What were they thinking.

Originally posted by Rob
there is so much crap in there it's unbelievable. Notice no microsoft domains though

Scroll down to the letter "X", where XBOX typos are featured.

They're only giving one example per letter of the alphabet, as stated in paragraph 47 of the complaint (page 12):

Plaintiffs are informed and believe and on that basis allege that many of Defendants' Domain Names are confusingly similar to famous or distinctive trademarks owned by others. ("Confusingly Similar Domain Names"). A list detailing some of the Confusingly Similiar Domain Names is attached to this Complaint is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit 5. Notwithstanding that Defendant has targeted nearly every single famous trademark in existence, for the sake of brevity the list of Exhibit 7 details only one famous trademark for each letter of the alphabet.

(emphasis added) Note they mention Exhibit 5 by mistake, as they likely cut/pasted much of the text of this complaint from other similar complaints, for example, paragraph 57 in the complaint of the recent Neiman Marcus v. Ultra RPM case:

http://www.loffs.org/neimanmarcus-v-ultrarpm/

that got settled.

Originally posted by GeorgeK
Exhibit 7 is pretty amazing.

Dayum!

Thanks George - I should have read closer. It does look like curtains for this outfit.

They should pray that they don't own any Vulcan Golf or Bo Jackson typos, given the aggressiveness in that case:

http://news.justia.com/cases/feature...v03371/210005/
http://www.domainstate.com/showthrea...threadid=78752

With all those alleged Disney typos, one day Disney is going to wake up and go after a lot of people.

What's funny is that with T.R.A.F.F.I.C. coming up in a few weeks:

http://www.targetedtraffic.com/orlando_show.html

Disney could personally serve some cybersquatters, if they attend the show, right in their hotel, which is owned by Disney,

http://www.register123.com/event/pro...D=0x4852047160