IKEAFans.com Sues IKEA

jadmperry

jadmperry

Fan
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
863
All of the above sounds like excellent analysis, so long as one does not actually reference the legal principles in play.

I could expand on these points further, but, I sense that the finer points might be lost and that most reasonable folks already have a decent idea of the issues.
 
Gladius

Gladius

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
176
Fansites that use registered trademarks in the urls are obviously piggybacking on the success of said trademark(s) and are also invariably at the mercy of said trademarks' owners - if you don't know that when you start and/or operate a site like that, then well... "You know nothing, Jon Snow." ;). There are thousands of trademark/copyright owners who defend the use of their trademark(s) in urls ferociously and in all cases (try creating a shopamazon.com and see what happens), some who only do it selectively and a small number who don't defend their trademarks at all. Arguing about how Ikea is the big bully or pasting Ikea panzer pictures is rather pointless. They have certain rights that come with their trademark and one of the more obvious ones is the right not to have others use their trademark without permission. If they do grant permission at some point they can just as easily revoke it as well. I understand the circumstances surrounding this particular site but I don't believe that that really changes anything from a legal POV. If you were the trademark owner and wanted to start your own community and failed for one reason or another (high popularity of a competing website certainly being a contributing factor), you would have little sympathy for the offending fansite.

This is business and while I'm sure that the amount of money ikeafans.com is making is a pittance compared to Ikea's profits, it only exists because and thanks to Ikea. I'm not a lawyer but frankly, I don't see how they could win this. They've sure got the balls (and apparently quite a lot of money) to go filing a lawsuit against an international with practically unlimited resources, though. Obviously this is a life or death situation for them, but these kinds of domain disputes happen on a daily basis with hundreds of trademarks. You just don't hear much about them because so far I don't recall a case where any fansite made enough money off their use of a registered trademark to even contemplate a legal battle against say Amazon, Canon, Sony, etc. As I understand it, from a legal POV, there is no distinction between a fansite or any other kind of website infringing on a trademark or copyright. You can only argue copyright infringement for the purposes of non-commercial commentary or criticism, but that is clearly not the case here. Ikeafans.com is making a lot of money off their website through the use of the IKEA words, logos and trademarks, associated merchandise and so on. Long story short, it all basically boils down to the first sentence of this post.
 
M

monte

Neophyte
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
7
Dark Matter said:
You being serious? You think if IKEA win then all others will follow their lead.

Do you not think Sony have taken tons of forums down already for doing this type of thing. Did everybody else follow their lead.
Click to expand...

What forums did Sony take down? I tried googling but couldn't find anything.
 
jadmperry

jadmperry

Fan
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
863
Gladius said:
Fansites that use registered trademarks in the urls are obviously piggybacking on the success of said trademark(s) and are also invariably at the mercy of said trademarks' owners - if you don't know that when you start and/or operate a site like that, then well... "You know nothing, Jon Snow." ;). There are thousands of trademark/copyright owners who defend the use of their trademark(s) in urls ferociously and in all cases (try creating a shopamazon.com and see what happens), some who only do it selectively and a small number who don't defend their trademarks at all. Arguing about how Ikea is the big bully or pasting Ikea panzer pictures is rather pointless. They have certain rights that come with their trademark and one of the more obvious ones is the right not to have others use their trademark without permission. If they do grant permission at some point they can just as easily revoke it as well. I understand the circumstances surrounding this particular site but I don't believe that that really changes anything from a legal POV. If you were the trademark owner and wanted to start your own community and failed for one reason or another (high popularity of a competing website certainly being a contributing factor), you would have little sympathy for the offending fansite.

This is business and while I'm sure that the amount of money ikeafans.com is making is a pittance compared to Ikea's profits, it only exists because and thanks to Ikea. I'm not a lawyer but frankly, I don't see how they could win this. They've sure got the balls (and apparently quite a lot of money) to go filing a lawsuit against an international with practically unlimited resources, though. Obviously this is a life or death situation for them, but these kinds of domain disputes happen on a daily basis with hundreds of trademarks. You just don't hear much about them because so far I don't recall a case where any fansite made enough money off their use of a registered trademark to even contemplate a legal battle against say Amazon, Canon, Sony, etc. As I understand it, from a legal POV, there is no distinction between a fansite or any other kind of website infringing on a trademark or copyright. You can only argue copyright infringement for the purposes of non-commercial commentary or criticism, but that is clearly not the case here. Ikeafans.com is making a lot of money off their website through the use of the IKEA words, logos and trademarks, associated merchandise and so on. Long story short, it all basically boils down to the first sentence of this post.
Click to expand...

Most of this is wrong or just too simple a statement.

In order to fully explain the issues would take hours of writing and some measure of explanation of basic concepts. I won't try to replicate the virtues of a legal education on a forum thread. I will, however link to (a bit aged) scholarly article that covers some of the issues: http://librarysource.uchastings.edu/repository/Barrett/39UCDavisLRev371.pdf Some of the issues will have likely been further addressed by courts in different Circuits. So, while the citations would need to be checked (Shepardized), the issues raised and differing approaches to the issues just show that it is not a clear case on its face.

I do not mean to suggest that IKEA, in its separate suit, does not have any claims. Nor do I suggest that they will definitely lose. I do suggest that it is not an "open and shut case." There are questions as to whether there is any Trademark use at all by ikeafans for purposes of various statutes, including the Lanham Act, if they are, whether they are using it in commerce (of course, they are running their site with ads support- but, if these are IKEA ads, served up through adsense, then that is IKEA using its own marks for sale of their own goods....hardly seems actionable on first look), and- again- many issues that are beyond the scope of what I am willing to spend writing in this thread.
 
s.molinari

s.molinari

Leader of Skooppa
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
5,034
To me, it is pretty clear and I personally don't need any legaleze to make it any clearer.

The site Ikeafans.com is there to support IKEA and it does support IKEA. The fact the owners make a living running Ikeafans.com shows the site is valuable, both for the owners AND IKEA. It is a win-win situation for sure and has been for the last 7 years, though, it seems IKEA doesn't feel they are winning enough from it now. So they want the site in their own control and the only legal means they have to acquire that control (other than paying decent money for it) is through the trademark usage, which is, anyone would have to admit, a pretty lame argument to insist a site belongs to you. At most, you can ask for the site to stop its use of the trademark protected name. You shouldn't be asking for the site assets to be handed over to you, IMHO.

Ikeafans.com was built from the work of IKEA's own fans along with a like or love for IKEA's products and services. It isn't all roses though, but that is a good thing too. At any rate, the two, the fans and the brand IKEA are codependent and now the lawsuits are like IKEA is fighting its own fans and followers and basically stabbing them in the back for being fans.

This isn't a trademark issue. It is a corporate stupidity and greed issue.

Scott
 
Gladius

Gladius

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
176
Oi, the "greed" argument again. Corporations exist to make money and internationals even more so. Claiming that one is more greedy than another is like saying one wolf is bad because it killed your sheep while the others are OK because they didn't. A purely subjective POV of view that everyone is certainly entitled to, but objectively, no corporation is under any kind of obligation to make sure that they don't appear "greedy" in someone's eyes - which they inevitably will no matter what they do.

As for whether what they're doing is stupid or not - it depends. If they lose, very likely. If they win, probably not really. Of course the most likely outcome is some kind of settlement, in which case it depends on what the arranged terms will be. I don't see it as a cut and dried case by any means. After you go through a few lawsuits, you learn that there's really very little fairness when it comes to legal matters. Most people who've never been to court are under the mistaken impression that (perceived) fairness and justice are somehow inextricably linked, which sadly isn't the case.
 
Lizard King

Lizard King

Habitué
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
1,086
It is a sad situation as i know how hard James and Susan worked on their sites all these years. They were a perfect couple on how to bring success to their website.

From friends perspective i hate Ikea with all my guts but from a company stand point , Gladius has a point.

Using trdemark in domain names is risky business and one day it can backfire to you.

I hope James and Susan wins the case and their attorney in The Netherlands are extremely good ( i just hope they agreed with the company i directed them to )
 
jadmperry

jadmperry

Fan
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
863
I have not gone to medical school. Nor have I gotten my PhD in physics. So, I usually refrain from discussing technical medical or physics issues and discussing the merits of the finer points because they are beyond my ken. I do try to keep up with medical advances and things reported online- I find the topics interesting. But, I haven't really anything substantive to add to those conversations.
 
s.molinari

s.molinari

Leader of Skooppa
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
5,034
Gladius said:
Oi, the "greed" argument again. Corporations exist to make money and internationals even more so. Claiming that one is more greedy than another is like saying one wolf is bad because it killed your sheep while the others are OK because they didn't. A purely subjective POV of view that everyone is certainly entitled to, but objectively, no corporation is under any kind of obligation to make sure that they don't appear "greedy" in someone's eyes - which they inevitably will no matter what they do.

As for whether what they're doing is stupid or not - it depends. If they lose, very likely. If they win, probably not really. Of course the most likely outcome is some kind of settlement, in which case it depends on what the arranged terms will be. I don't see it as a cut and dried case by any means. After you go through a few lawsuits, you learn that there's really very little fairness when it comes to legal matters. Most people who've never been to court are under the mistaken impression that (perceived) fairness and justice are somehow inextricably linked, which sadly isn't the case.
Click to expand...

You are right. One person or another might take any action a corporation makes as greedy. But who is claiming one is greedier than the other here? I am not. I am saying this effort to take over the Ikeafans.com site, after their own failed attempt to start a community, is a clear sign of greed and closed minded and small thinking. It isn't an argument. It is the clear situation. I am also not the only one who thinks this either. Look at the comments in the articles written about this. It is all really bad PR for IKEA and the more they fight for this, the more it will look bad on them, unless they come up with some much better arguments for their actions.

Scott
 
Gladius

Gladius

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
176
Depends on what you consider a good cause. Is significant competition to their own community attempts a good cause? From our POV it isn't, but from a corporate trademark holders' it certainly is.

We're only getting one side of the story here, which may or may not be the whole truth. I'd wait to hear Ikea's claims as well. This is certainly going to be an interesting case to follow.
 
Joeychgo

Joeychgo

TAZ Administrator
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Messages
7,028
Gladius said:
We're only getting one side of the story here, which may or may not be the whole truth. I'd wait to hear Ikea's claims as well. This is certainly going to be an interesting case to follow.
Click to expand...

Agreed
 
A

Adam

Habitué
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
1,858
Joeychgo said:
Although they don't specifically state it, it looks like Ikea wins
http://www.ikeafans.com/home/signing-off-susan-james/

and the whois now shows: Registrant Organization: Inter IKEA Systems B.V.
Click to expand...
Well that really blows (sucks).

I'd like to think they sold out and were not crushed by some multi billion dollar corporation. At least that is a happier thought. The idea of a company being able to forcefully take whatever they wish isn't a pleasing one.
 
Satelliting

Satelliting

Participant
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
79
This is just a question, but does not IKEA have this right? Its like making money on the success of another corporation's success? Is not IKEAFANS piggybacking IKEA by gathering a group of IKEA lovers and using them to make a profitable site? I am assuming its profitable because of how the owners put its their livelyhood.

Is this not the same thing as another company being able to buy off domains from people for a certain price purely because the domain is only popular because of the buyers company? Like say FamilyGuy.com was not owned by the Family Guy company, couldn't they buy it since it is because of them the domain is popular?
 
Joeychgo

Joeychgo

TAZ Administrator
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Messages
7,028
Considering I've found no court documents or announcements of dismissal, I would bet they settled.

And no, its not so simple. They don't just have the right. There are trademark exceptions for "Fan" and "Sucks" sites. But I wont get into that here as it would steer the thread offtopic
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top