Summit VS Twilight.com

[Nathan]

Summit Pictures has filed a lawsuit against Twilight.com, which was registered all the way back in 1994 (predating all the books and movies), because they feel like it's confusing consumers and hurting their brand.

One look at Twilight.com and we can tell immediately that it isn't official — and because it actually links to Amazon to point people in the direction of buying the books and movies, this seems really ridiculous.

It just looks like a giant company whining that they don't own the rights to what could be the official site. A giant company mounting legal battles because they don't control EVERYTHING that has to do with Twilight

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/twilight-movie-studio-sues-twilightcom-232907

 

[c4smok]

You should never link or build something associated to a copyrighted material. Exp: linking to things for sale with that copyright etc. While having the main term in general of that trademark/copyright.

The whole site is built around the whole Twilight book/movies theme..

It is just asking for trouble.. It should have been deved into something or sold a long time ago =X. Its too bad when people do this without researching and damaging their own claim on their own mark.

Putting ads by that content is even worse..

 

[Archangel]

The owners are making money off Twilight, thus they've screwed themselves over. They'll lose the domain and it's their fault.

 

[alien51]

Reading the news article, it seems the lawsuit doesn't include a demand to claim the domain. They merely want compensation for damages resulting from the vampire association of the word "twilight" as depicted in the website. Or a demand to shutdown the website, but not forfeit the domain in favor of the movie studio.

I checked the website, he even has "The Twilight Zone" science-fiction link. lol

I would think that if this guy was using "contextual"-based ads, he's probably going to be safe from litigation.

By the way, i noticed his website is just a 1-page site with zero content. Isn't this a violation of terms with Adsense? He has 4 blocks of Adsense in there.