Internet Law
Baker & McKenzie Prevails Over Preteen in Narnia Domain Name Lawsuit
Posted Jul 25, 2008, 02:28 pm CST
By Martha Neil
Initially fighting a losing battle, seemingly, in the court of public opinion, Baker & McKenzie has notched a victory over an 11-year-old opponent in the World Intellectual Property Organization.
It held Wednesday that the estate of author C.S. Lewis, who wrote the Narnia children's books, rather than Comrie Saville-Smith is entitled to the www.narnia.mobi domain name his parents bought him as an 11th birthday present, reports Wall Street Journal Law Blog.
The estate sued after the boy's parents rejected earlier offers to buy the domain name.
Additional coverage:
The Scotsman: "Once upon a time in Narnia, a little Scots boy lost a battle with corporate lawyers …"
ABAJournal.com: "Baker & McKenzie in Court Fight Over 11-Year-Old’s Birthday Present?"
Related Stories
- Skadden Says: Yes to Associate Bonuses, No to Layoffs
1 hour, 11 minutes ago - 5 Gitmo Detainees Held Unlawfully, Federal Judge Says
1 hour, 53 minutes ago - Court Interpreter Shortages Worsen, Especially for Rare Languages
2 hours, 8 minutes ago - Celebs Sue Each Other Over Gated Road in Star-Studded Calif. Community
2 hours, 20 minutes ago
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Comments
Posted by Melissa - 3 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 10 hours ago
This kid’s a force in the courtroom, though. That’s what they’re not telling you.
Posted by kay sieveding - 3 months, 3 weeks, 4 days, 19 hours, 18 minutes ago
It seems like trademarks are becoming more valuable at the same time that patents are becoming less valuable. Trademarks are more bought thru advertising etc. whereas some patents made individuals wealthy without them being wealthy first. Patents offer upper mobility whereas trademarks are the property of financial assets more likely. (Even though Harry Potter story was rags to riches for the writer.)
Another thing I don’t understand is why it is so easy to get an injunction against use of a trademark on the Internet to make $ for someone else but so difficult to bar use of a person’s name or id to make $ for someone else—thru covering up defamation etc. It seems like a double standard where natural persons get fewer rights than corporations and business entities. First, it was a stretch to even recognize corporations as persons in law and now they get more rights than real people? I don’t get this. It’s supposed to be really difficult to get injunctions related to publications regarding real people but it seems when there is a business involved, it is easy.
Posted by Guy - 3 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, 23 hours, 5 minutes ago
+1 to Melissa. Great comment…