So I have received another letter from my union about the websites that are registered to me. The first letter was a clear cease and desist letter making very strong accusations that I am infringing on the trademark. This letter still states “As a legal matter, these are considered identical to the Union’s domain name.” The Union is stating that the three sites that I have legally registered in my name and have full use and access to, are infringing on the Union’s Trademark. It continues to state “the fact that access to your site is unrestricted.” This statement is untrue and offends me because for the past three years I have been working hard at teaching myself scripting for security purposes. Both the first and this letter are based off of unsupported accusations and to continue such actions can and will be considered as intimidation and harassment.
I will be replying to this letter to make sure that my Union is aware of their accusation and allow them the opportunity to research their information again. Here are some simple facts to take note of:
1. The mentioned registered website names are not, have not or ever will be used for commercial purposes as long as they are registered to me.
2. These sites have not and will not make profit off the use of the sites.
3. I have not ever offered to sell these site names to anyone.
4. The bc.org site I did shut down even though it pertained to the black caucus events only.
5. The .net site has always had a under construction landing page and has never had anything derogatory towards my Union.
6. The .info site is a fully secure site that is by invite only and even if someone registers with the site they still only have limited access. Member access and higher is only granted to registered users that are personally known and are aware of the full use of the site.
As you can see there are many areas my Union needs to investigate and rethink about before they send me another letter. Their facts are not accurate and false statements are being made. I have even done a Google search on the Trademark name and my sites do not appear in the first page of links. The official site appears, Youtube sites appear and personal blog sites appear but not my registered sites.
I will keep you posted on this event as it continues.
3 comments:
I don't think that it's a question of mere "inaccuracy", but open intimidation and legal incompetence.
Keep your paper trail, and I encourage you to remind them of legal precedent on the matter:
"The ACPA does not prevent the fair use of trademarks or any use protected by the First Amendment, which includes gripe sites.[12] In Mayflower Transit, L.L.C. v. Prince, 314 F. Supp. 2d 362 (D.N.J 2004), the court found that the first two prongs of Mayflower's ACPA claim were easily met because (1) their registered trademark was distinctive and (2) Defendant’s “mayflowervanline.com” was confusingly similar to Plaintiff’s Mayflower trademark.[13] However, when the court was examining the third prong of Plaintiff’s ACPA claim, whether Defendant registered its domain name with the bad faith intent to profit from Plaintiff, the court found Defendant had a bona fide noncommercial use of the mark, therefore, the ACPA claimed failed.[14] “Defendant’s motive for registering the disputed domain names was to express his customer dissatisfaction through the medium of the Internet.”
-jw
Reading the letter, it appears that your union is heading in the direction of considering disciplinary actions against you under union by laws. These actions can include fines, and even dismissal from the union.
While on solid legal ground with regard to the rights to these domains and to use them for a noncommercial purpose, this right will not safeguard you from union discipline. The language used in the letter (i.e. "best foot forward", etc.).
As the plea in this letter is not of a legal nature, one wonders why it isn't coming from Jon Hunt rather than the Local's attorney.
You can avoid discipline of course by resigning your membership (you would continue to be represented by the bargaining agreement - if you had one). Your membership would automatically be restored each calendar year unless you specifically state a desire to continue as a represented nonmember each January.
Non-members, while still subject to a bargaining agreement and still paying an "agency fee" to the union for representation, would not be subject to bylaws, or union discipline.
Thank you for the comments. I am not worried about legal or union discipline from these letters. As usual, information that the Union is stating as factual is not and they lack any clear documentation that supports their accusations that I have done what they are saying I have done. The only thing the union can clearly state is that I am a registered owner of those three sites. All other information stated in those letters is unsupported and are not true.
I am sort of hoping they do take this further and allow the facts to speak out for themselves. Though others have become worried about these letters and have requested me to bow down to their instructions, I will continue to stand strong for what is right. The union has picked this route to attack my character and to test my abilities. I will continue to stay public and strong while our union officers show their true colors.
Thank you again for your supporting comments they do mean a lot to me. -Chris
Post a Comment