box1 header1
Entry Detail
Terms of Use The data on this site is for education, insights, and entertainment, and is not to be used for commercial purposes. If you want to use content for noncommercial purposes, be kind and give us due credit. To read the full Terms of Use, click here.
Options Conduct New Search
Copy Permalink to this Item
 
Andre 3000 vs. Cybersquatter
Highest Court E.D. California
Year Ended 2009
Plaintiffs Andre 3000
Business Entity of Artist(s)
Clothing Manufacturer(s)
Defendants Individual(s)
Other Outkast
Short Description Plaintiff is Andre Benjamin, better known as Andre 3000, half of the hip-hop duo Outkast and owner of a clothing line called Benjamin Bixby. Defendants are father and son, the latter named Ben Bixby. After Andre announced his plans to launch the Bixby clothing line, Defendants registered domain names like benjaminbixby.com, benjaminbixbyclothing.com, and other similar names. When Plaintiffs inqured, Defendants alleged they intended to use the sites to showcase little Ben Bixby's motocross photography, and said Plaintiff's $5,000 offer for the domain names was insufficient. Then (here's where it gets ridiculous), Defendants posted on their website images of clothing and messages indicating the intent to sell clothing, but nothing about motocross. Further, they used "Andre 3000," "Outkast," and other similarly confusing terms as metatags, so the site would come up in search engines for Plaintiff and his companies. Man, that's bogus. Of course, this opinion doesn't discuss the substance of the complaint, but merely granted Defendants' motion to transfer the action to Michigan, where Defendants reside and where their infringing acts took place. While Defendants' case seems pretty weark, they most likely succeeded in annoying the hell out of Andre 3000. - LSW

Legal Issues
Conflicts of Law Jurisdiction & Forum Venue
General Equitable Actions Unjust Enrichment
Torts Privacy Torts Commercial Misappropriation of Name/Likeness
Trademarks & Unfair Competition Federal (Anti-Cybersquatting Cons. Prot. Act) Cybersquatting
  Federal (Lanham Act) Trademark Infringement
    Unfair Competition, False Advertising & Related Torts
  State Statute/Common Law Right of Publicity


Opinions Benjamin v. Bixby
2009 WL 2171781
E.D. California , July 21, 2009 ( No. 1:08cv1025 AWI DLB )


Errors Do you see something that is not correct?
The Discography is an ongoing project. Some entries in the database are displayed in various stages of completion. If you see spelling or grammar issues, they are likely to be corrected in the near future as they're noticed by editors (they're on the "To Do" list, we promise). But If you notice errors regarding facts, legal conclusions, or other information, please contact us to let us know. We've done our best, but can't assure perfection. Thank you.


Related Searches Parties
Andre 3000 ( Plaintiff )
Business Entity of Artist(s) ( Plaintiff )
Clothing Manufacturer(s) ( Plaintiff )
Individual(s) ( Defendant )
Outkast ( Other )

Legal Issues
Conflicts of Law / Jurisdiction & Forum / Venue
General / Equitable Actions / Unjust Enrichment
Torts / Privacy Torts / Commercial Misappropriation of Name/Likeness
Trademarks & Unfair Competition / Federal (Anti-Cybersquatting Cons. Prot. Act) / Cybersquatting
Trademarks & Unfair Competition / Federal (Lanham Act) / Trademark Infringement
Trademarks & Unfair Competition / Federal (Lanham Act) / Unfair Competition, False Advertising & Related Torts
Trademarks & Unfair Competition / State Statute/Common Law / Right of Publicity

Courts
E.D. California (highest court)


permalink to this entry