Skip to main content


Showing posts from November, 2010

Fiverr pays damages to competitors for wrong trademark claim?

In the recent development of Fiverr 's illegal route of blocking/suspending/closing competitors' PayPal accounts, PayPal is unblocking many of it's competitors sites. But, the serious question here is the damage enforced by Fiverr and PayPal. Will Fiverr pay damages to the sites for it's alleged trademark ownership and shutting down the competitors through PayPal's Acceptable Use Policy division? There are lot of other questions too: What will be the action taken against Fiverr by PayPal? Who will pay the damages--for blocking the competitors' site for about 1-week time? How come the company in Israel claims that it owns a trademark--without owning it? What will be the action taken by US government on Fiverr? and PayPal? What's the future of the micro-entrepreneurs--when big companies act and play monopoly?

Fiverr takes unlawful route with PayPal AUP for competition tactics

The hot news is that the Fiverr takes unlawful route with PayPal AUP division to put the competitors in dark by suspending/blocking the site's PayPal accounts. Problems with Fiverr Fiverr's trademark claims are wrong as they have merely "applied" for Without sending any legal notice to the respective sites, Fiverr is taking PayPal's AUP in hand to close the competitors' accounts Fiverr's trademark applications are looking joke as they're trying to trademark basic English terms like "I will", "gig", "for" and their "DamnQuickPay" is a definite legal contradiction with 1-Click Problems with PayPal Looks like PayPal's AUP is automated or they won't look at legal dispute papers clearly Without any redefinition on AUP, anybody can suspend or block the competitor's site for sometime Bottom line When legally challenged by the competitors, Fiverr or PayPal would have to pay the damages Related Links F