The legalty of shitty.name

[Shoehorn!]

Here's a quote, directly from the Supreme Court:

"Trademark law does not permit Plaintiff to enjoin persons from linking to its homepage simply because it does not like the domain name or other content of the linking webpage." Finally the court held that given the lack of "connection with goods or services," the standards for unfair competition are "not satisfied simply because a prospective user of the Internet may face some difficulty in finding the home page he is seeking."

There you have it. You CAN link to any site you want from any site you want, and there's nothing that anyone can do, no matter how much they hate the fact. Just thought this deserved it's own thread.

[Doctor Dre]

Hrmm when I was in school they were asking us emails from every sites were linking too . I guess that changed :P

I was bitching everytime I had a work to give. That's a really stupid rule

[Abbie Bueller]

Uhhh. Dre, could you repeat that, only using longer words so that my dumb ass can understand?

[Shoehorn!]

Originally posted by Doctor Dre
Hrmm when I was in school they were asking us emails from every sites were linking too . I guess that changed :P

I was bitching everytime I had a work to give. That's a really stupid rule

I dunno, but if Ford and it's high priced legal team can't stop an independent publishing company from linking to it's page, I am certain that integrated won't be able to do anything about it. Besides, imagine how silly and impossible it would be to inforce such a law that says you can't link to a certain page without the owners permission.

[Gemini]

It probably would depend on how a judge percieves that site... is it a parody? (doesn't appear to be), Does it defame others' domains on a wholesale basis and I imagine alot more things.

On the libel side, the person filing the suit would have to be able to PROVE libel which isn't all that easy.

But ICANN might take exception to it, bypassing the legal system. The rules pertaining to domain usage might apply.