It will be interesting to see how this law suit is resolved, but if Keith Urban is successful in his suit against Keith Urban (same name, different guy), the implication will be that the rights of the famous trump the rights of the rest of us, once again highlighting that the “us vs. them” in this country is not about money, it’s about fame.
Singer Keith Urban sues Keith Urban over Web site: Urban has filed a lawsuit against a painter of the same name, claiming that the lesser known Keith Urban’s Web site infringes trademark and cyber-squatting laws.
Singer Urban filed the suit in U.S. District Court in Nashville, Tennessee, Friday against the New Jersey painter who uses the Web site address www.keithurban.com to advertise oil paintings for sale.
The singer, 39, wants the other Web site to be shut down and its domain name transferred to his ownership. He also seeks unspecified monetary damages.
Damages? He suffered damages because a painter with the same name has a website, using his own name, where he sells paintings that he probably also signs with his name, and happened to reserve the domain name first? What damages could he have possibly suffered? Are the paintings so bad that Urban the singer has been embarrassed that people believe they are his paintings? (Actually, they are quite good) Have people been buying paintings from Urban the painter believing he is really Urban the singer? I guess anything is possible, but how is any of this Urban the painters fault?
This is show business arrogance on display folks. How dare someone use their own name if it happens to be the same name as the famous Mr. Urban (the singer, not the painter).
I wonder who was born first. Maybe the guy who was born first gets to keep the name and the other guy has to change it, not just for the website, but for everything. Perhaps Urban the painter should file a counter suit insisting that, as a Jersey guy, he is embarrassed that people confuse him with an Aussie who sings country songs.
I checked out the painter’s website. The copyright notice indicates the site has been around since 1998, before Urban the singer was even a solo artist… talk about arrogance. He gets “famous” after this innocent painter, who clearly was not trying to piggy-back off of the singer’s fame, establishes his place on the net, and the singer wants the painter to not only move, but also pay damages? Are you kidding me? Damages? Was this painter supposed to wake up one day and realize some arrogant singer with am inflated ego was going to have a hissy fit over a website that this painter had before anyone even heard of Keith Urban the singer?
Amazing!
|
|
|
|