Insurance.com cease and desist
- 10th Mar 2008
- Leave a Comment
- Internet Marketing
This is cool I used to have a vertical directory and just got a cease and desist from insurance.com, 2 things jump to mind, one there was no name on the email or telephone number, the return email address went to a non-specific domain not solicitors…
so is this a real C and D or someone trying to get links remove for insurance.com ??
_______________
Dear Sir/Madam
I am contacting you on behalf of Insurance.com, located in Cleveland, Ohio. We manage Insurance.com’s Internet monitoring function for brand identity issues on the Internet.
The following website ( removed ) uses the trademarked name of Insurance.com or one of its subsidiaries on its site.
As owner of the name, Insurance.com (and/or its subsidiaries) owns the exclusive right to reproduce and use its trademarks and authorize any reproduction and use. Insurance.com does not recognize the use of its name in the above-referenced site as authorized. Therefore, your use of this trademark is a violation of its rights.
Insurance.com demands that you cease and desist from using its name in any manner and that you remove all use of its trademark from the referenced website.
Please address these issues immediately. Please contact me with any questions.
Sincerely,
Trademark Administration
Insurance.com
20 Comments | Leave a comment »
no telephone number = not real in my book.
What lawyer have you ever met who does not want to be contacted for billable hours?
To quote (loosely) from a movie:
I’m giving you a direct order from Section 8.
Section 8 doesn’t exist.
We don’t take orders from people who don’t exist.
I think that this is bogus… it might be from a competing website that would like to see Insurance.com loose some links!
Yer, I agree totally pitfall and GerBot, looks like Competitor Disruption to me
DaveN
I guess competitors will try anything.
Think of how many sites will just remove the link rather than deal with the hassle. It’s an anti-linking campaign!
[…] Dear Sir/Madam […]
Itsa bloody brilliant anti-link building strategy to hit competitors with. Just brilliant! … Except, off course, when you hit webmasters like Dave that just don’t trust anyone or anything hehe :)
If they are based in the US, then trying to enforce this would cost them a lot of time, effort and £££. I’d agree with the others - a very good way of getting rid of competitors.
Its surprising how many people & companies assume that anything “legal” is 100% genuine and legal and comply straight away.
First of all, whether it is real or bait, it is not a legal notification. So until Po Po is knocking, there would be no repercussions to face anywho…I think I’d either let it ride or, if you’re pressed about it, contact them the only way you know how and then eat a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. If they don’t shut you down by the end of the sandwich, then you’re probably going to blog another day.
Very creative way to do a anti-linkbuilding strategy :)
But i must say, i think its a cheap way to remove competitors from sites and/or directories.
[…] day I wrote about a sneak seo scam. Today on DaveN’s blog he uncovers another SEO anti-linking tactic used for […]
That sort of thing is low and pathetic and I am guessing it will backfire on the company is doing it. You know what they say about karma.
Very creative piece of naughty SEO but I agree with David Eaves - this kind of thing comes back to you.
This is a great ploy. If I was doing it, I’d also put a telephone number on there and answer all the calls as well, to give it that air of legitimacy. Plus, I’d also set up a forwarding mail address and a genuine-looking web site.
Looks like a c&d from an automatic monitoring service. My fortune 50 company uses one and the c&d letters sent from it look very similar to that. But there should have been contact info on it. I would probably just ignore it. If they are serious, they will send a second.
I think its pure brilliance. It would be interesting to see how many sites actually drop the listing once they receive the letter.
[…] Anti Link Building dead? Dave Naylor shows that it probably isn’t. […]
Dave, I don’t know about the UK, but in the US I don’t believe a C&D is considered delivered unless it is sent via certified mail and signed for as email is not 100% reliable.
Not a lawyer, but a guy who’s paid lots of lawyers (and listened well).
-OldSchool
Looks like spam to me, especially since it came in via email.
[…] Anti Link Building dead? Dave Naylor shows that it probably isn’t. […]