[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Previous in Thread] [Next in Thread]

Subject: RE: UKNM: website hijacking
From: Alex Chapman
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 19:31:08 GMT


It seems crazy that anyone would even think of such a thing in the present
day and age and as a list member I just wonder what the motivation for
doing so is.

As a lawyer I look at it and see pound signs (I know I am supposed to - its
a lottery) and think that there is some firm out there with a very
interesting case on their hands.

Professionally I can't say for certain that this is a case of copyright
infringement (which if done knowingly and on a commercial scale may be a
criminal offence) and, as you say, passing off, without knowing more about
the facts. However in a hypothetical case where X has a site and Y copies
it substantially then it would be.

The reasons:

In the tort of passing off in that:
the use of a site that is an imitation of x's without x's consent, may be
calculated to cause confusion and has / may cause confusion and damage;
members of the public may be led to believe that the y's goods and services
are those of x or x's business and/or are in some connected or associated
with x;
y may have acted with the intention of taking advantage of x's reputation
and goodwill or alternatively knowing of the risk of confusion and decided
to take that risk.
it is or can be inferred that it is their intention to appropriate x's

Further or in the alternative under the Copyright Designs and Patents Act
1988 in that:

x's site constitutes an artistic and literary work (software code etc) in
which artistic and literary copyright subsists;
x is the author and first owner of copyright subsisting therein (if it is);
the creation for and use by y of a site that is an imitation of x's without
x's consent may amount to copying and issuing of copies to the public.

Further x may be entitled to additional damages pursuant to section 97(2)
of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 by reason of flagrancy of the

x may be entitled to commence proceedings against ijacko and a Court may
make an order against it. The remedies available to you at the Court's
discretion are:

(1) An emergency injunction restraining y from infringing x's rights until
trial or further order;
(2) A final injunction following trial;
(3) Delivery up or destruction on oath of any material offending against
the aforementioned injunction;
(4) Damages or an account of profits; and
(5) Legal costs.

Its hard to be more specific here as far as advice is concerned - there are
a number of free articles and briefing notes at our sites www.briffa.com,
www.gameslaw.com and www.justadlaw.com for general advice though.

Do give me a mail off list if you want to talk the matter over (free of

All the best


Alex Chapman
Business Design Centre
N1 0QH

t: 020 7288 6003
f: 020 7288 6004
d: 020 7288 6076

e: alexatbriffa [dot] com

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Brownlow [SMTP:rickatpims-sca [dot] com]
Sent: 19 December 2000 17:28
To: uk-netmarketingatchinwag [dot] com
Subject: UKNM: website hijacking

<< File: ATT00011.txt; charset = Windows-1252 >>

Finding it impossible to trawl through mountains of irrelevant
information on the web? Trying but failing to reach a niche market?
Help is at hand with the launch this week of online advertising
marketplace ADictive.com - the solution to all your advertising needs.

Visit http://www.adictive.com to find out more.
To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to
http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing or helpatchinwag [dot] com

[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Next in Thread] [Previous in Thread]