Susan Scheff v. Psyborgue [1] SummaryThreat Type: LawsuitDate: 07/31/2008Status: ConcludedDisposition: Dismissed (total)Location: Switzerland Verdict or Settlement Amount: N/ALegal Claims: Cybersquatting Susan Scheff, a self-described “parent advocate” who “assists parents of troubled teens research and identify programs and schools that can assist their troubled teens in getting back on track to a healthy, productive lifestyle” and the publisher of www.suescheff.com, filed an administrative complaint with... read full description PartiesParty Receiving Legal Threat: Michael Crawford (aka Psyborgue)Type of Party: IndividualType of Party: IndividualLocation of Party: FloridaLocation of Party: FranceLegal Counsel: Broad and CasselLegal Counsel: Pro se Description Susan Scheff, a self-described “parent advocate” who “assists parents of troubled teens research and identify programs and schools that can assist their troubled teens in getting back on track to a healthy, productive lifestyle” and the publisher of www.suescheff.com, filed an administrative complaint with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center against "Psyborgue" pursuant to the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) [2]. (The UDRP is a policy that website operators automatically agree to when they register a domain name; the policy enables trademark owners to initiate an administrative proceeding challenging the registration of a domain name in "bad faith.") "Psyborgue" is the name Michael Crawford used to register the domain name "sueschefftruth.com." Mr. Crawford, who represented himself in the WIPO action, stated in a declaration that he registered the domain name primarily to "provide information to the public regarding Sue Scheff, her company PURE, and the quality of services offered under the name free of charge to parents." According to the WIPO administrative panel: The website associated with the Domain Name posts Mr. Crawford’s blog comments, media articles, court documents, and postings by readers concerning [Sue Scheff]. Typical postings question [her] objectivity, assert that she or her daughter have financial ties to some of the institutions and programs that [she] recommends to parents, and allege that some of these programs have been implicated in charges of child abuse or neglect. A disclaimer at the head of the website advises, “This site is not endorsed by or affiliated with Sue Scheff™. The WIPO panel denied Scheff's complaint, finding that Mr. Crawford was making a legitimate, nomcommercial fair use of the domain name for purposes of criticism. The panel indicated that "[t]o the extent the Complaint may be read as suggesting that the Respondent registered and used the Domain Name in bad faith because his purpose was to defame the Complainant, such a claim is essentially outside the scope of the Policy." Related Links: WIPO Aritration and Mediation Center: Susan Scheff v. Psyborgue [3] CMLP: Scheff v. Bock [4] DetailsWeb Site(s) Involved: sueschefftruth.com [5] Content Type: TextPublication Medium: BlogSubject Area: TrademarkGripe Sites Court Information & DocumentsJurisdiction: SwitzerlandSource of Law: United StatesInternationalCourt Name: WIPO Arbitration and Mediation CenterCourt Type: AdministrativeCase Number: D2008-1177 CMLP Information (Private)Threat Source: User Submission Form