Thursday, June 19, 2008

Who Won?

In case you didn't know, Urban vs. Urban was quietly settled in a court in Tennessee in mid-April. As of this writing the painter still has his web site and the singer doesn't have the .com after his name. So what was the purpose in this?

First, it produced a lot of headlines for both parties. The singer wanted to flex his muscle and use his "growing" fame to garner the corner on all things Keith Urban. The painter had more hits to his web site. More importantly for the painter, it got him a healthy heaping helping of public sympathy. Something that was probably very unexpected for the singer.

Second, this showed how using legal means to get ones point across does nothing more than cause bad feelings and wastes the court’s time. How much did both parties spend to settle without it going to court?

Third, we don't own our names. We shouldn't be so full of ourselves that we assume that no one else could be creative or want to use their name to foster their own career.

Keith Urban looked petty and vain in even attempting to do this. Sure the painter may have misled people to his site but it’s up to the people to decide if it’s that Keith Urban or the other one. I hope they both wised up, but given who the singer is married to, it probably won't be the last time we see his name in court. Come to think of it Urban vs. Kidman has a nice sound to it.

36 comments:

notachance said...

Wonder why the painter doesn't have this outcome up on his website? He has all the other filings listed?

And btw - his, the painter's, website is 100% different and in no way could be misconstrued for Keith L. Urban, the singer, anymore. Hate to say it, but looks like KLU got 1/2 of what he wanted (or was that all he really wanted to begin with?).

SettleDown said...

The painter's site has looked like it does now for a very long time. It used to be different, but the look you see now was there long before any legal action was taken to sue him.

Does Mr. Urban (the painter) have a sense of humor - or just ironic that a butterfly follows you around on the screen?

ecoaster70 said...

"The painter's site has looked like it does now for a very long time. It used to be different, but the look you see now was there long before any legal action was taken to sue him."

No it wasn't. He didn't DRASTICALLY change his site until just AFTER the lawsuit was filed.

He knew what he was doing. He was even at one point corresponding with fans making them believe that he really was the singer Urban. He had comments up saying that "for those who don't know, painting is a hobby". Hobby? Painting is this guys profession. At one point, he even had a picture, supposedly of his niece, with an acoustic guitar strapped around her neck. How ironic. Before he changed the look of his site, he commented that there had been a big increase in interest of his paintings. Wonder why.

All that was needed was some kind of disclosure, but this guy refused. He wanted to cash in and I'm glad he finally got nailed.

doublewide said...

i remember a long time ago seeing the "painting is one of my hobbies" comment on the painter's site. this was several years ago and at first i thot keith painted. LOL only for about 30 seconds, though, then i figured it out.

notachance said...

Yes, the first time I looked for a KU website I found the painter's site. It was a little confusing but I thought, this can't be the same guy and I kept trying and found .net.

Thank you ecoaster. I knew I wasn't all that crazy.

SettleDown said...

Yep, it used to be different.

I visited it for the first around mid '04. And, it was not crystal clear he wasn't KU until you took maybe 30 seconds to look around, then there was no doubt this guy wasn't KU the singer.

However, the site did change to what you see now before the legal action was filed in '07.

Maybe he was getting complaints by Keith the singer and changing the site was his way of giving in and making it perfectly clear he was a painter only.

But of course with Tom's ex-wife's clout on his side, the singer decided to sue him anyway.

maclen said...

It sounds like after hooking up with the publicity and image obsessed kidman, the orb was convinced to greatly protect his, at the time anyway... expected far more "valuable" name and higher tabloid visability, as a result of his marriage to kidman. And of course in retrospect, it turned out that belief was unfounded, his name and visabilty has actually faltered, as seen in cd sales decline and his need to piggy back on stronger performers for live gigs...or so... also in retrospect, the orb just took legal action out of the fear this other urban, a painter, would sell more cds than he!

doublewide said...

also in retrospect, the orb just took legal action out of the fear this other urban, a painter, would sell more cds than he!

HA! good one maclen

realitycheck said...

notachance and ecoaster you are correct. They gave him months to change his website and he did nothing until legal action was taken.

UMyths, the legal system is what we have when the guilty party doesnt make amends on their own. And this is certainly the case here. This has nothing to do with NK. And no we dont own our names but "Keith Urban" the country singer is a product. As all singers singed by labels are. And by what Urban the painter did, he was infringing on that product knowingly. Its irrelevant that some of you figured it out it wasnt singer KU, because the fact is no one visiting the painters site should have to "figure it out". If you have the same name as a celebrity and you are selling merchandise with that name, you better be damned sure you are being straight forward you arent that celebrity. Because even if you arent doing it deliberately, it can look like you are.

ZOE said...

Blah, blah, blah...another KNOW IT All comment from the KNOW IT ALL REALITYCHECK, that knows everything about everything that is ever posted! Why don't you go on over to NK lovers site & grace them with with some of your KNOW IT ALL knowledge!!!

realitycheck said...

maclen said "as seen in cd sales decline and his need to piggy back on stronger performers for live gigs"

LOL Keith is still a strong seller despite an overall cd sales decline. Looking at Amazon, Keith's GH is ranked nearly twice as high as Dierks' GH in overall cd sales. Dierks is #23 in the "Today's Country" category and Keith is #13. Keith also outranks him in the Bluegrass category!

Its not piggybacking if an artist asks KU to come play at their shows. Kenny sells out stadiums because he has several artists come on tour with him. And if you are referring to Carrie U as the stronger performer you must be asleep. She still needs to learn a thing or twenty about stage presence and connecting with the crowd. I hope she gets rid of that ball gown and Guns and Roses cover.

realitycheck said...

zoe, I'm putting you on "ignore"!

Tara said...

UMyths, the legal system is what we have when the guilty party doesnt make amends on their own. And this is certainly the case here. This has nothing to do with NK. And no we dont own our names but "Keith Urban" the country singer is a product. As all singers singed by labels are. And by what Urban the painter did, he was infringing on that product knowingly. Its irrelevant that some of you figured it out it wasnt singer KU, because the fact is no one visiting the painters site should have to "figure it out". If you have the same name as a celebrity and you are selling merchandise with that name, you better be damned sure you are being straight forward you arent that celebrity. Because even if you arent doing it deliberately, it can look like you are.


Wait let me pick myself up off the ground from laughing so hard
second the painter is guilty of being Keith Urban?? Excuse me
but the painter probably has more rights with his name since that is his REAL name as opposed to Keith Urban who name is really Urbhan or however you spell it there is a letter missing remember.
He is not guilty because there was no crime committed. The site hasn't changed anymore than this one has or Keithurban.net.

ZOE said...

RC said: "I hope she gets rid of that ball gown and Guns and Roses cover."

Yeah, yeah, yeah, since your girl NK really knows how to dress...dress like sh*t!

realitycheck said...

" zoe, I'm putting you on "ignore"!

BOO hoo, I am so hurt!!

doublewide said...

Blah, blah, blah...another KNOW IT All comment from the KNOW IT ALL REALITYCHECK, that knows everything about everything that is ever posted! Why don't you go on over to NK lovers site & grace them with with some of your KNOW IT ALL knowledge!!!

DITTO!

and carrie underwood's cd sales are thru the roof....even if she doesn't have much stage presence. she packed 'em in.....more than keith did.

maclen said...

doublewide said...
"also in retrospect, the orb just took legal action out of the fear this other urban, a painter, would sell more cds than he!

HA! good one maclen"

thanks doublewide...so doing a little research into this story...seems that the american, "Jersey" Urban registered keithurban.com in May of 99... the orbs first US album didnt come out until Oct of 99... seems the orb is a litigious "Johnny come lately"... ( and I wonder why?) and most certainly and without doubt expected his "grand and fabulous and charasmatic persona" to sway this case in his favor... or no doubt had expectations that being mr nicole kidman would do the trick. Well after seeing the negative comments and anti sentiments mostly aimed at the orb, I am not surprised that the case was simply settled...and also no doubt a gag order is in effect on both sides... so to the orb, I just have to say..."Nice play shakespeare!"..you really have the pull and power... to settle out of a PR blunder...

maclen said...

Doublewide said...
..."and carrie underwood's cd sales are thru the roof....even if she doesn't have much stage presence. she packed 'em in.....more than keith did."

...well dw, it's no surprise that underwood has the #1 country single... what of the orb? So much for his so called "stage presence" huh? So again, I ask, what of the orb?

doublewide said...

yeah maclen, stage presence doesn't sell cd's.

at the concert i attended, alot of people left after carrie. her fan base is HUGE

realitycheck said...

Sorry folks but #1 singles dont guarantee you longevity. Unless you have the musicianship, stage presence, and charisma of a performer like Keith Urban you wont be able to sustain a career and tour long after mainstream country radio is done with you. Look at people like Dolly, Vince Gill, Emmylou Harris. They continue to be tour favorites and still have that career without being the hot artist on the block. And there are so many fans of Carrie's that have commented on various KU boards that they came for Carrie and stayed for Keith. There was maybe one or two reviews out of the entire tour that favored Carrie over Keith. Frankly, the statement that Carrie puts on a better show than Keith is a total crock.

Here's an update for you maclen...Shirt is about to break the Top 20. This is one so-called "bomb" that will explode all the way to the top of the charts.

And one more thing...yet another country artist has gotten Keith to record a duet for their new album...Lee Ann Womack..c

ZOE said...

Oh...yes......REALITYCHECK shows us once again that she knows it ALL! Just ask her she will tell you!!!

marcia said...

maclen, what's the 'orb' mean when referring to keith? i'm a little slow on the uptake!!!!

doublewide said...

Frankly, the statement that Carrie puts on a better show than Keith is a total crock.

for the record....i NEVER said this....she DOES have a huge fan base and has sold a ton of cd's.

you're preaching to the choir

banbotox said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
maclen said...

marcia said...
"maclen, what's the 'orb' mean when referring to keith? i'm a little slow on the uptake!!!!

Glad you ask marcia... one of my fav shows which airs on the sci fi channel here in the states, is called "Ghost Hunters". They are an organization that takes a very scientific and hard proof approach in investigating peoples claims of paranormal activity in their homes, old prisons..etc... their aim is to gather actual "proof" of "ghosts, spirits..etc... by using a wide range of electonic devices such as digital cameras and digital recorders, etc ...so anyway, as they exlain... "An orb, which will sometimes be caught in film or even digital photos, is the energy being transferred from a source (i.e. powerlines, heat energy, batteries, people, etc) to the spirit so they can manifest. This may not even be a conscious thing the spirit is doing, just a natural way they get their energy. This would explain why the orbs are round"...And it just struck me that urban's involvement with "Casper, the neurotic actress"...pasty and pale as she is, it just seemed a comical identification for me... originally, I had started by refering to him as the urb... but the "orb" just has a certain ring to it.

doublewide said...

so doing a little research into this story...seems that the american, "Jersey" Urban registered keithurban.com in May of 99... the orbs first US album didnt come out until Oct of 99... seems the orb is a litigious "Johnny come lately"... ( and I wonder why?) and most certainly and without doubt expected his "grand and fabulous and charasmatic persona" to sway this case in his favor... or no doubt had expectations that being mr nicole kidman would do the trick. Well after seeing the negative comments and anti sentiments mostly aimed at the orb, I am not surprised that the case was simply settled...and also no doubt a gag order is in effect on both sides... so to the orb, I just have to say..."Nice play shakespeare!"..you really have the pull and power... to settle out of a PR blunder...

nail - head, maclen. since he became mr. nicole kidman, he thinks he's all that and a bag of chips. well, he ain't. in fact, i would conside it a liability.

CJ said...

1. I don't remember all the details - I've slept a time or two since - but I'm sure reality check and snorea will gleefully point out my errors. A year or two before KU filed his internet lawsuit Tom Cruise filed an internet lawsuit. I don't remember over what or if he won or lost. I do remember many fans at the CMT message board blaming Nic's influence for KU filing the lawsuit after so many years had passed. Both websites were set up in 1999. The painter got there first. If KU really wanted .com so bad why wait so long to go after it? Once again, NK was following in TC's footsteps. If he could file an internet lawsuit for publicity so could she - through the new man in her life.

2. Painter was born Urban. Musician was born Urbahn. Not sure if he ever legally changed his name to Urban or just uses it as a stage name but painter legally had the name, as well as the website, first. Nic hasn't learned she can't buy or bully people into getting what she wants because usually, eventually she most of the time can. Unfortunately, under her influence, KU is trying it now as well.

3. In the early 2000's the painter had a message on his website to the effect "I try to reply to all emails when I can." If a musician fan emailed the painter and asked if he was the singer they were politely replied to "No, I am not the singer Keith Urban. His website is www.keithurban.net." I asked out of curiosity what he would say even though it was obvious he was a different KU.

maclen said...

Yes, I agree... that is the interesting point, why did it take the orb 8 years to bring this issue to public light in a lawsuit? It was either just disinterest, ignorance or more likely a change in "managerial control" having a concern in the orb's future public image...and the dissemination and structure ... not to mention the sources, of the orbs public image. Certainly it was an attempt to try and control where and how his "taken" name, and by whom, that "taken" name was to be used. If this legal action was in fact "settled" and Jersey urban still owns his site and is still shilling his paintings...certainly thats an indication by the orb that he had no case, and most certainly shows that he came to realize what an embarrassing PR blunder this turned out to be, and simply made it fade away by settling... or more likely, kidman just got cold feet and shivered at the thought of once again being called into court to testify!.. certainly since jersey keith had the nerve to file a countersuit... imagine the nerve of the guy!!

WorkingMom said...

cybersquatting cases are nothing new.. and are very common place

There are law companies dealing with web and domain name disputes..
an example can be found here

http://dozierinternetlawpc.cybertriallawyer.com/net-attorney

You'll find many prime examples where celebrities are claiming infringements on their 'name' or similar - as well as many companies..

The following is from the above site regarding Mr. Mayweather (a famous boxer)

There are a number of issues involved in these lawsuits. One of these cases deals with a fan club, another case deals with the use of only his last name which is not inherently distinctive and arguably does not have common law rights attached to it, and two others that apparently use this famous boxer's name to direct traffic to boxing industry sites. There are many, many issues that have to be considered when acquiring interests in domain names that potentially infringe on registered and/or common law trademarks.

Four lawsuits have been filed in Las Vegas by the "best pound for pound fighter in the world and one of the best technical boxers of all time" against cybersquatters. The first case involves the use of his nickname in the domain name "www.moneymayweather.net". The second case involves the use of "www.mayweatherpromotions.com", which is obviously a partial use of the boxer's name. The third case is based upon the registration and use of "www.floydmayweather.com". All three of these sites allegedly linked to boxing and related services. The fourth Defendant was sued for using the "www.floydmayweather.net" domain name and having it resolve to a website that purported to be Mayweather's official website. All of these sites are alleged to have a commercial interest in using the domain name.

I don't think KeithUrban.com vs KeithUrban.net would be a stretch of imagination to see the similarities and want to eliminate the 'possibility' of directing traffic to an errant site.

Would anyone consider that the person or person(s) behind the lawsuit could possibly be spurred by the record company or label and not NK or KU per se? Just a thought...

maclen said...

...ps...

hey, just wanted to add....went to jersey keith's website and followed a pdf link of an article about the suit and countersuit by the "kiefs" at Tennessean.com ... almost in a karmic bit of the absurbity of this whole debacle... the last name of jersey keith's attorney is "Kruse"!!! Kidman must have "plotz" when she saw that! Ladies and gentlemen... the true reason this case was settled!..
FYI... from the "urban" dictionary...
1. plotz
Pronunciation: (plots), key
—v.i. Slang.
to collapse or faint, as from surprise, excitement, or exhaustion.

2. plotz
From Yiddish, to fall down from extreme excitememnt or abhorance.
When i heard she had slept with my roommate, i was about to plotz!

3. plotz
burst, with surprise
When I heard that, I almost plotzed!

4. plotz
To shock, surprise, take aback, astound to the extent of fainting,
Krusty: I opened for The Who at Woodstock. I came out in a Beatle wig with a ukulele. Hendrix said he almost
plotzed -- his exact words.

yingyang said...

http://www.femalefirst.co.uk/entertainment/Nicole+Kidman-52892.html

Ya'll see this one?

I don't get the devotion some people have for this woman.
It reaks like NK

CJ said...

"Would anyone consider that the person or person(s) behind the lawsuit could possibly be spurred by the record company or label and not NK or KU per se? Just a thought..."

And again I ask, if that was the case, it came from business associates, why wait so long to go after .com? Why not back in 99 when they set up .net because .com wasn't available when painter only had a few months invested in it instead of so many years. No, the lawsuit was filed after NK came into his life after she got the idea from her ex.

notachance said...

Does everyone, meaning skeptics, really think that NK has control over the people that watch out for Keith's best interests? He does, and has had, pretty top-notch people working for him all along. It's doubtful that just because NK comes into the picture that things would change. I mean really, they share CAA in common, Borman is CAA for all intents & purposes (and not an idiot) and neither is Ansel. It's very possible that they had tried to resolve that situation outside of the courts for a long time to no avail and when push came to shove, Keith had to file suit.

don't believe the lies said...

I still don't understand why Keith had to file suit? It made him look like an arrogant jerk. So what if the guy has the same name. Is he just bitter because he can't have the .com? It still makes no sense. I also find it interesting that when he filed suit it was everywhere and then when he loses it's nowhere. I didn't even know they had reached a decision.

Notachance...While I don't think Nicole rules the world (thank god) I do think her...oops I mean Toms money has A LOT of influence and control. I think she, and other Hollywood stars, buy people. I think the all mighty dollar can do miracles in la la land. She definetly has the people that work for Keith watching him for her. So yeah I do think she controls the people around him.

notachance said...

dbtl - did he lose? We don't know anything of that sort. We know the case was dropped/settled. How was it settled? Well, for one we can tell the Urban the Painter has changed his website - as for any monetary consideration for that? We'll never know now, will we? If there was any money from Urban the Singer then I would say this whole thing was a win/win for both sides. Urban the Singer got Urban the Painter to alter his website so that there was NO mistake as to who it belonged to, and Urban the Painter got a nice retirement package in the deal that was no shirt off the singers back. And both parties are legally mum, hence the reason why the painter doesn't have the outcome of the suit posted on his site.

And oh yeah, probably just an insignifant blip on the singers radar as "paperwork signed in a lawyer's office".

ShutUpAndSing said...

"And oh yeah, probably just an insignifant blip on the singers radar as "paperwork signed in a lawyer's office"

___________________________________
Too bad it wasn't the divorce papers..lol

wastedemotion said...

Hey RC-
Since you know all answer me this....
Following your logic Keith should have sued every person who had a myspace or facebook (or any other social network site) that used his name and didnt make sure they were saying they werent him....but he didnt....why the painter?!
There were and are plenty using his name and didnt/dont say anywhere Im not Keith Urban the musician....where's the lawsuits!!!
Also around the time of this lawsuit was the crack down of illegal concert video taping....I remember several people being contacted by Keith's lawyers about their youtube accounts....seems to me like somebody was a little sue happy.