Hardrock69
08-12-2010, 11:10 AM
For alleged crimes which have yet to be committed:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100811/01343110578.shtml
Here is the actual court document:
http://docs.docstoc.com/orig/715794/cedb8dab-bd4e-41e6-8f7f-7d95104b700a.pdf
Music Festival Producer Pre-Sues Bootleggers (HR69 note - they are talking about bootleg t-shirt sellers)
from the minority-report dept
Ah, pre-crime. THREsq has a worrisome story of a couple of recent lawsuits by concert producers pre-suing potential bootleggers claiming trademark infringement. Yes, they're claiming trademark infringement for something that hasn't happened yet, and simply listing out hundreds of John Doe and Jane Does who can later be filled in. As a part of this, they're getting law enforcement involved by using the lawsuit to ask the court to order US Marshalls, local and state police and even off-duty officers to go ahead and seize and impound the bootlegged material.
It's really quite something to read the lawsuit which refers to possible events happening in the future:
The article notes that it seems unlikely that any defendants will show up in court to defend themselves or to protest the lawsuit, since they haven't done anything yet. So, basically, the lawsuit is allowed because there's no one to contest it, because who's going to contest such a lawsuit? THREsq reasonably points out how troubling this trend is:
The threat of bootleggers is real, of course, but it's based purely on speculation, without evidence of the kind of past specific misconduct that might trigger temporary remedies as seen in criminal proceedings. That seems odd, and perhaps a slippery slope. Why can't any company in America file John Doe trademark action and get police to seize goods they believe will be infringing? What stops this beyond the concert venue?
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100811/01343110578.shtml
Here is the actual court document:
http://docs.docstoc.com/orig/715794/cedb8dab-bd4e-41e6-8f7f-7d95104b700a.pdf
Music Festival Producer Pre-Sues Bootleggers (HR69 note - they are talking about bootleg t-shirt sellers)
from the minority-report dept
Ah, pre-crime. THREsq has a worrisome story of a couple of recent lawsuits by concert producers pre-suing potential bootleggers claiming trademark infringement. Yes, they're claiming trademark infringement for something that hasn't happened yet, and simply listing out hundreds of John Doe and Jane Does who can later be filled in. As a part of this, they're getting law enforcement involved by using the lawsuit to ask the court to order US Marshalls, local and state police and even off-duty officers to go ahead and seize and impound the bootlegged material.
It's really quite something to read the lawsuit which refers to possible events happening in the future:
The article notes that it seems unlikely that any defendants will show up in court to defend themselves or to protest the lawsuit, since they haven't done anything yet. So, basically, the lawsuit is allowed because there's no one to contest it, because who's going to contest such a lawsuit? THREsq reasonably points out how troubling this trend is:
The threat of bootleggers is real, of course, but it's based purely on speculation, without evidence of the kind of past specific misconduct that might trigger temporary remedies as seen in criminal proceedings. That seems odd, and perhaps a slippery slope. Why can't any company in America file John Doe trademark action and get police to seize goods they believe will be infringing? What stops this beyond the concert venue?