UDRP Lambo.com: Following UDRP loss, Respondent files lawsuit against Lamborghini

[News]

Lamborghini S.p.A. won the UDRP it filed against the domain Lambo.com; now the Respondent and registrant of the domain is hitting back with a lawsuit.

The case between Richard Blair, plaintiff, and Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A, defendant, refers to the Lambo.com domain’s acquisition as a follow-up to adopting that moniker (Lambo) as a private alias for activities in various online communities...

Read More

 

[jberryhill]

No real surprises in there. As I noted upthread, the April 9 status conference transcript seemed to be of keen interest, and the brief relies on a statement of counsel during a procedural conference in order to establish a substantive point. Whether that point ends up in dispute is yet to be seen. That part is here:

I wouldn't rely on a personal statement of counsel to establish a substantive element of a claim, especially considering that it is more or less what we call a "fact question". That's the sort of thing a jury generally is left to decide.

There are 138 pages of exhibits, but I'm not paying 10 cents a page to download them all from Pacer and upload them to Courtlistener.

It's worth pointing out what a motion for summary judgment is all about. The movant, here Lamborghini, has to show that on the undisputed facts of the case, they are entitled to judgment merely as a matter of law. That requires the absence of a disputed issue of material fact that would have an impact on the outcome. In other words, the parties can disagree on a whole bunch of things, but summary judgment is based on (a) the body of facts on which the parties do agree, or (b) facts which the parties may formally dispute, but for which there is no reasonable basis for disagreement. In other words, you can't win on summary judgment merely because you sincerely believe and insist that grass is blue and the sky is green, and call that a material issue of disputed fact.

The brief is a fairly workmanlike and uneventful plod through the elements of 15 USC 1125(d), and a roundup of factors which a court may consider in determining bad faith.

They do not attempt to pre-emptively address certain arguments that are likely to be raised in the reply, but they are going to let the plaintiff get those arguments on the table and address them in rebuttal.

If you want to see a masterful use of a rebuttal brief, then the current motion for attorney fees, the opposition, and rebuttal in the TRX.com case shows the power of keeping your powder dry and giving the other side an opportunity to dig in deep. <https://domainnamewire.com/2024/04/29/a-gish-gallop-in-cybersquatting-lawsuit/>

Next up, the Plaintiff will draft and file their response to this brief, and its always best to have a look at both sides before deciding how these kinds of things might turn out. That's what courts are for.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

There are 138 pages of exhibits, but I'm not paying 10 cents a page to download them all from Pacer and upload them to Courtlistener.

Exhibit T: Pity the fool

THE COURT: If tomorrow Lamborghini offered him that 35 million, he wouldn't take it?

MR. LEWIS: He has told me that he would not take it.

THE COURT: And he would testify to that under oath?

MR. LEWIS: He'll testify to it under oath, Your Honor.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

if you downloaded those from PACER, you can do the world a favor and install the RECAP browser extension. RECAP is the mechanism that uploads docs to Courtlistener.

Ahh... good info! I guess I assumed that info was autouploaded anytime somebody paid for it. I had downloaded the files from pacer prior to installing the RECAP browser extension, and it doesn't look like there's a way I can retoractively upload those using the RECAP extension. But will do for any future domain related queries!

It’s a crime that our court system charges a page fee for pdfs.

Probably a mix between a mechanism to prevent abuse, and an attempt to squeeze court costs? I agree it should be free, but at it's free if you're under $30 per quarter!

Not sure, but there’s a footnote about the Archive.org wayback machine which may become significant later on.

Forgive my noviceness, but where is the footnote you're referring to?

Wondering (since it apepars I'm unable to re-upload the PDFs to courtlistener) if there's a particular exhibit I should upload to nP, or if I should just upload everything I downloaded from the Statement of Facts, tand from exhibit A to U?

 

[Samer]

.

 

[MasterOfMyDomains]

good

Sorry you closed your account borker.
Go cuddle with your friend adam dicker
Whats with lambo.com ? On topic, I typed it in to see whatsup and got errrors
file:///System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/SafariShared.framework/CertificateWarning.html

 

[DomainNature]

Let's not forget that the Complainant did not take action to take the domain, until they were contacted by me to offer rebranding opportunity which they rejected, this means that they did not care about a shorter brand until my contact.

Also i consider that if i buy a domain today, which did not had a Trademark at the time of registration, I m rightful owner, the Trademark could be created after they have seen the Domain name, I expect that to happen after my big release of a info, that is why I will destroy those who will create products/services based on my domain names, lazy grabbers.

 

[DomainNature]

Show attachment 252840

What's next?

 

[jberryhill]

 

[Keith]

Show attachment 253802

For those of us that aren’t legal pros, what does this say?

 

[Mister Funsky]

holds out for the $50M

I'm thinking a 2025 Urus (with all the nifty upgrade options) and 150K cash in walking around money would make me happy...but it is not my name so it is easy to speculate!

 

[Chris Hydrick]

**In 2020, @JagG created a nP thread detailing his twitter spat with Lambo regarding ASZ.com

Ooops, that hyperlink erroneously contained a broken mail to link instead of the intended nP thread.

Correct link: https://www.namepros.com/threads/a-quick-due-diligence-saved-losing-25k.1203053/

Spoiler: Due Dilligence Preview