Quote:
Originally Posted by pornlaw
Actually its the maturation of any industry. Consolidation, cannibalism or survival of the fittest ? Only the strong survive in a shrinking economy.
And if you meant that grabbing the domains of pornstars to drive traffic, then yes, the low hanging fruit is gone.
It use to be that pornstars were told that it would be $500 - $1000 - $1500 to buy back their name from someone who was enterprising enough to grab it before someone else did.
Now its going to be pay and give it back, or pay to defend an IP suit.
This industry is no different than the music industry. The record labels no longer have the power they once did. Tower is gone, Virgin doesnt sell that much music and MTV doesnt show videos. Illegal or legal downloads have given power back to the musicians to control distribution of their content. Clip4Sale.com is not that much different.
Times are a changing....
Michael
www.AdultBizLaw.com |
The question will be about things like fair use, etc. I don't for a moment support people who buy domains just to ransom them to people, but at the same time, I also think that some of these broader swipes she is taking should fail. It is particularly key that she has almost certainly performed "work for hire" that would include her image and her name as a result. At some point, her "star" name isn't hers alone anymore, but is something that has been sold off in pieces to others, who in turn resell it to others.
Imagine someone who picks up 50 DVDs and makes a membership / fan site. What domain should he use? sexydevinnlane.com or somepornstarsite.com?
Let's say he runs sexydevinnlane.com for 2 years, and then decides to shut it down. The domain is paid for 5 years. Should he just turn it off? A parking page? Perhaps redirect the traffic to a DVD site that might have some of Ms Lane's DVDs for sale?
Should she have entire and total control of all uses of her name at all times in all ways, without restriction? Does this mean that a work for hire contract with a pornstar doesn't grant any rights at all to use their name? Does it mean that content with a particular star legally licensed and collected together cannot be identified by a domain name?
Further, while she was aware of the domain registrations three years ago, why would she wait this long to take action to protect her trademark name? Did she jealously protect her trademark, or is there a sudden outside influence that has her showing up with lawyers in tow?
Any ideas?
There is much here