A government watchdog let its domain name expire. Someone advocating for the other side registered it.
An advocacy group in the city of Kenner, Louisiana let its domain name expire. Now someone in opposition to the group is using the domain.
Citizens for a Better Kenner, Inc., is a non-profit watchdog of the local government. It registered the domain name CitizensforaBetterKenner.com in 2011 to promote its cause.
Then, apparently earlier this year, it let the domain name expire. Someone with a very different message registered the domain. The website now has the message:
Thank you to Mayor Zahn, the Kenner City Council, and Chief Glaser for doing an excellent job keeping our city moving in the right direction in 2019.
The overwhelming volume of Kenner residents appreciates what you do!
In a lawsuit (pdf) filed to try to recover the domain (as well as the matching .net and .org) and get damages, Citizens for a Better Kenner states that “The opinions and content as currently displayed on the website are in stark contrast to the actual opinions of the actual CFBK.”
The non-profit alleges that the new owner of the domain is cybersquatting and has “a bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill created over eight (8) years by CFBK.”
The group might have trouble proving this. It does not appear that the current owner has a profit motive. It simply appears to be exercising its own free speech with the “opinions and content,” which may be a plausible defense in the case.
Granted, it may not be clear to people when they visit the website.
Jim Sox says
If the domain name is so important to them, why didn’t they renew it instead of mismanaging such an important strategic asset and allowing it to expire as if it meant nothing to them? Where are their priorities?
wanker says
They didn’t realize how important it was until they lost it.
David Michaels says
This Complaint by the Citizens for a Better Kenner, Inc. is an abuse of process.
It’s an attempt to figure out who bought the domain after it expired and it’s an attempt to silence speech. I wonder, how strong is the anti-slapp law in Louisiana?
It can be dismissed with a 12(b)(6) motion:
In addressing the sufficiency of a complaint, “the tenet that a court must accept as true all of the allegations in a complaint is inapplicable to legal conclusions.” Id. at 678; see Pension Benefit Guar. Corp., 712 F.3d at 717 (“Although for the purposes of a motion to dismiss …
First, it doesn’t recite any registered US trademark or use that would give rise to a common law trademark. It fails by just making a bald assertions:
“13. Defendants are utilizing and profiting from the political and/or otherwise goodwill of CFBK created and held over the course of its existence which exceeds eight (8) years.
14. “Citizens for a Better Kenner” constitutes a mark. ”
Second Bald assertion: “4. Venue is proper in this Honorable Court.”
And it’s the matter is in the wrong venue. It should be an In Rem case in the EDVA, not against Perfect Privacy LLC and John Doe in the ED of Louisiana.
Andrew Allemann says
Can you do an anti-slapp on a cybersquatting dispute?
wanker says
lol they are suing the whois privacy service?!
Andrew Allemann says
Typical first step until identity is revealed.