Multinational wants my domain ...

[Negative]

Something else that might be of interest: if a site is not used for commercial purposes, it completely falls under the First Amendment. Since (as far as I know) Dreamworks does NOT own the copyright to the name "Shrekkie", they have absolutely no case.

This changes entirely if your site is used for commercial purposes (even putting a link to your friend's webbuilding site on your site falls under commercial purpose): then it all falls under the Lanham Act, and it is up to Dreamworks to prove that your site causes confusion.

Some examples: it is completely legal to register Dreamworkssucks.com: Dreamworkssucks.com is purely an expression of free speech and the Lanham act is not invoked, as long as your free speech is not commercially misleading.

The only points Dreamworks could have, are:

- They own the copyrights on the name "Shrekkie" (I couldn't find anyone owning that copyright)
- Your site is commercially misleading.

You don't need a lawyer... you need to ask them for proof of their "Shrekkie" copyright, tell them that your site is not commercial, tell them you'll put a link to the official Shrek-site on yours, and tell them all you want is $1,000 to hand over the domain-name (that seems to be the best offer in most cases)...

[Tiger Shark]

Maybe we should start a whole big ring of X"ie" sites:-

Lordoftheringsie
Terminatorie
DieHardie

etc......

Maybe we could make some cash. We break even for every 35 domains registered....

[CXGJarrod]

Warner Bros did the same thing with Harry Potter and asked for the domain names to be given to them. A couple of people fought it and Warner Bros decided that it wasnt worth it anymore....(The letter you recieved is probably some form letter they send to anyone who comes up with Shrek in google)

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/17706.html

[aeallison]

I see it, as do most of us, that they are trying to strongarm you. Sell them your domain rights, if they won't buy it, and can't prove they have copyrights to "shrekkie" then copyright the name yourself... right now! And further correspondence can be used to sue them.

( as TigerShark says ) Then duck!!

Just my 2 cents

[gold eagle]

As all the others said - investigate your laws in Belgium, the EU itself and maybe the US. It seems on the surface that your site should be ok. I spoke to a trekkie on this kind of issue last year and he was strongly threatened regarding the matter, but, in the end the claimants backed off.
You might have a shot.

[pwaring]

Well, the way I see it is:

1. You registered the domain in good faith
2. You're using it for non-commercial purposes
3. The site has been up for some time and no-one has complained
4. Your site doesn't contain offensive content
5. Your domain name is 'shrekkie', not 'shrek'

Point 1 means you can't be accused of cybersquatting and point 2 means that you're not competing with Dreamworks Inc. and so you're not harming their commercial interests. Points 3 and 4 negate the argument that you're bringing the name of Dreamworks (or one of their trademarks) into disrepute, and point 5 shows that you're not actually infringing their trademark, since different trademarks must be registered (at least over here in the UK). Had you used shrek4 or something, you could be in trouble because adding numbers to a trademark doesn't make it a new one.

Of course, I'm not a lawyer, so I can't guarantee that the above points will negate Dreamwork's case (if they are serious rather than just using scare tactics), but at the end of the day I think they'd back down rather than go to court. Heck, if they do try seriously to take your domain I'll just register shrekkie.org or something similar and draw out the process even further.

[CXGJarrod]

Any more news Shrekkie? Have you responded to them yet?

[hiddeninclouds]

You might want to take a look at this
http://www.antionline.com/showthread...ight=Microsoft

[MrLinus]

One thing did surprise me about the Mike Rowe case that perhaps you should be aware of, Shrekkie. The minute that Rowe asked for money apparently changed the view of the "purpose" of the site and it was viewed that his intent wasn't for personal use but for domain squatting. So perhaps a lesson to NOT ask for money outright.

[Shrekkie]

Well my lawyer advised me finally not to ask money, cause the domain is not there for
commercial purposes.
And since i used the logos and fonts it could backfire. Also I personally am not interested in fighting a multinational and the stress that comes along, only for a personal domain.
If I didn't use the logo nor the fonts, the case would be different.

It surely is pityful and doubtful, but heh ...

Anyway, all thnx for the advice ...

Greetz,