Poorsh Anti-Cybersquatting!

[cegerer]

How'd you like to be convicted of that? Can you imagine the conversation around the lunch table at the state prison: what're you in for? murder 1. what're you in for? armed robbery. what're you in for? anti-cybersquatting .

One of my favorite Porsche classified websites - Porsche Classified Digest - has been hit by the Porsche legal department. They've now changed their name to www.enthusiastcars.com. They've posted the actual letters (I'm not sure why they refer to poorsh.com - that wasn't the URL?) -- Curt

[billwagnon]

That is a good site - that's where I found my car!

Too bad Porsche has lawyers and stuff.

Maybe we should start calling any pre-996s "Orsches" and then trademark it!

[Doug E]

I wonder how PCNA picked a law office from Minnesota to represent them ????

[TimT]

poorsh.com? meaning that some pronunciatiation that vaguely might sound like the trademark owners name is cause for this action.....? i havent visited Poorsh.com, but if they in fact use the crest etc they should remove the connection and any trademarks they use tomake you think it is a genuine Porsche site

Im just wondering if Poorsh.com is an acronym for "Poor ****head" or something........

I respect Porsches pursuance of its legal rights....kinda like when they blew out the flame on Porschelist.com.......

Why did they do that? Porschelist was and is (rennlist now) a celebration of these wonderful parts of our lives, Pelican rennlist, and numerous other forums give us fantastic resources to help maintain the marque.

[Bill Douglas]

Maybe poorsh.com should send PNA a bill for all the good work and promoting of their product.

Nostatic, we await your (your wifes) comments...

[pwd72s]

Whatta load of dog doo-doo. Makes me just want to rush right out and buy a new Cayenne...sure it does. I wonder, if there were a similar site specializing in 'Vettes...would GM sue???? 'scuse me, but this is REALLY candy donkey!

[Iggy]

This guy certainly looks scary to me. I'd bet big money that his only contribution to that letter was inclusion of the term POORSH.COM and his signature.

By the way, the first defense to a letter like this is a plain, large print disclaimer that the site is not affiliated in any way with that automaker that has its head up its a$$. It eliminates the "likelihood of confusion" that the Lanham Act uses as its definitive test.

Bottom line is that notes like this are intended to scare and intimidate people. 99.9% of people will buckle under the fear of legal fees (their own).

Check out the web site for Michael Gannon, attorney at law:

Fish and Richardson
(type the last name "gannon" and hit the "go" button)

Does this guy even shave yet?

[CamB]

Does this mean I'm going to get a letter asking me to desist using www.porschecankissmyass.com?

[cegerer]

Does this guy even shave yet?

LOL. I'll bet he drives a leased Boxster. -- Curt

[nostatic]

I got a similar letter a few years back when I owned nostarbucks.com. Starbucks took offense to the site and the logo I had created (the Starbux green circle logo with an outer red circle and line through it...enough of the mark was obstructed that I felt it wasn't infringing). I could have fought it, but since I wasn't doing much with the site, I just ignored the letter and eventually let the domain expire.

I'm sure the other real lawyers with chime in, but I believe one way you can legally use someone else's trademarks is in parody. The point of the law is to prevent confusion on the part of the consumer. Most companies are happy with a simple disclaimer if you use their mark. Others (Disney and Porsche come to mind) don't like anyone to do anything associated with the mark. Anyone remember the story about the cow in the midwest years back that had black and white markings that looked like Mickey Maus? The farmer evidently was charging people to see the cow and Disney legal shut him down.

So maybe a Porsche parody site? I'll have to ask legal counsel about the details on what you can get away with.

[stormcrow]

The letter is an interesting read. It is clear that they are saying if you use a name similar to that of Porsche (Poorsh) and in any way represent the products they sell, then they have a case against you. What they did not tell you is that if you use a name similar to theirs but do not in any way infringe on what they sell, then they have no case.

Example would be a company called ProAir Inc. which deals in the business of heating and air conditioning. A company called ProAir Airlines that deals with the business of the airline industry would not be infringing on ProAir, Inc and in this instance ProAir, Inc would have no case against ProAir, Airlines.

Another example would be Toys R Us. There are a lot of companies that use their "R's" backwards but with different names.

So, if you use the word "Poorsh" or "Poorch" or something similar as long as it's not associated with the auto industry I would think you would be in the clear.

Disclaimer

The information posted above is hereby Disclaimed.

Steve

[island911]

Prehaps he should just change it to Poorshmo.com

[GoodMojo]

Or change it hellasweet.com and run the entire site through the jive talker: http://rinkworks.com/dialect/dialectp.cgi?dialect=jive&url=http%3A%2F%2Fforums.pelicanparts.com%2Fshowthr ead.php%3Fs%3D%26threadid%3D84190

Oh, I see it's already being squatted...

[RANDY P]

Originally posted by nostatic
I got a similar letter a few years back when I owned nostarbucks.com

That was YOUR site? I think I remember seeing it, and I laughed my a$$ off...

rjp

[pbs911]

Just wait till a Porsche NA big wig goes into a certain popular restaurant and finds a drink on the menu called the "Purple Porsche margarita" which is descirbed as "a turbocharged" beverage.

[Superman]

I'm sorry, but I cannot think of this topic as anything but ludicrous. Can I assume that in this country I am free to talk about Porsche automobiles? I do. I mean, I do assume I am free to have this kind of discussion. Can I do it on the Internet? Again, I assume that the right to discuss is the right to discuss. Can I call it PorscheTalk? If someone can successfully sue me for disclosing that it is Porsche automobiles I am discussing, then can they effectively prevent me from discussing them in a way that others can receive my remarks and know what I'm talking about?

I'd like to be a party to a case where a citizen is defending his right to make truthful remarks about a product that a German automaker has freely elected to market in my country. This is the same country where you can go on national television and call the President of the United States a liar, and get away with it.

Somethin's happenin' here. What it is ain't exactly clear.

Thanks for humoring me, guys.

[724doorE]

Obviously the letter is a blatent lie as Porsche no longer supports big time motorsports activities! Look at the second paragraph that says they have spent a lot of time and money promoting their product... The present shmo's haven't spent any time, it was the last 50 years of victories in high quality racing that made the name famous. Maybe everyone who chooses to race a P-car should be able to charge P for the advertisement they are getting.


Oh well..... this is just another tidbit of proof they are a bunch of wienies now!!! And not the same company we knew and loved!!!

[Jgordon]

Superman --- I hear ya.

[boyo]

The issue isn't only the name, if they'd registered "Poorsh.com" and it had not been Porsche related, no issue. You could even make it a Porsche related enthusiast site, but there would need to be very clear indication that Porsche A.G. owns the name, and that you don't use the trademarks (like the crest).

But apparently (from the letter - the site is no longer up and no longer cached in google) they were using the (1) Porsche name, (2) an imitation of the crest, and (3) it was a commercial business.

Go back a few years - boxster.org got a similar letter. Turns out the commercial part of it was keychains or refrigerator magnets or something. If there was nothing commercial about it, there would have been no letter. All it takes is one dollar sign and it's legally considered a business.

Why would Porsche do this - are they just weenies?

The answer is no - if you don't actively enforce your trademark, you give up all rights to it. Once you've given up your rights, you become Kleenex or Xerox and it becomes an un-enforceable trademark due to dilution.

There are people out there using the Porsche name illegitimately, and there are those just having fun as enthusiast. As long as there's no commercial connection, there's no confusion. As soon as there is, the law views them the same.

(Disclaimer: I ain't no lawyer! But I have been confused with a marketing guy whose job is to put (r) and (tm) where appropriate.)

-Boyo


p.s. The law firm in Minnesota has been doing all the Porsche work. From what I recall, there were literally HUNDREDS of sites infringing on the trademark. 90% were porn sites (porschegirls.com, etc.), so if you want to blame anybody...

[Cornpanzer]

This has been going on in the VW world for several years. There has been documented cases where such simple site of the type as "Jim-bobs purple VW site" have received a "cease and desist" letter from the lawyers of VWoA. Can you imagine being some 12 year old boy who has a po-dunk website dedicated to your favorite car and getting a threatening letter from the manufacturer. As a contributer to the performance VW site "Cal-Look.com" we have recently been warned by a vender of our merchandise that VWoA is looking for us because our T-shirts show the rear 3/4 view of a Cal-LookVW bug. He was asked by the lawyers "how do we locate this Cal-Look.com company?" What jackasses. From what I hear, you can no longer buy repro VW hubcaps or hood logos because of the trademark infringement laws.....of course it is totally irrelevent that VW doesnt offer them for sale either. If you need them I guess you are SOL. One SoCal parts house had the VWoA lawyers show up at his door with a search warrent and had somewhere around $30,000 worth of merchandise confiscated because of this garnbage. So, be aware that this is very real and they take it very seriously. Sounds like Porsche is using the same lawyers. What VW doesnt realize is that they are damaging thier reputation terribly with thier original market base.