05|13|2008 5:05 pm EDT
Call Girl Goes After Girls Gone Wild For Cybersquatting
Ashley Alexandra Dupre, the reported mistress of former New York Governor Elliot Spitzer, has filed a $10 million lawsuit against MRA Holdings, producers of the popular Girls Gone Wild videos. Among the many allegations, the filing cites violations of the Lanham Act including cybersquatting domain names. Other Lanham violations include profiting from trademark infringement, false designation of origin, false represenation and false description of goods. Dupre’s attorneys claim that the company and/or agents are cybersquatting by owning and using several domain names which contain Dupre’s name such as AshleyDupre.net GirlsGoneWildAshleyDupre.com, and AshleyDupreCallGirl.com.
MRA Holdings and Mantra have experience with domain name law, at least in the arbitration process. The company has gone after domain name owners through arbitration at NAF on a number of domains such as girlsgonewildusa.com and girlsgonwild.com. MRA have also been sued plenty of times, Duprey’s attorneys may have a hard time proving some of these allegations.
Related Posts
RSS feed for comments on this post

4 Comments
Mak Ossa
May 13, 2008 @ 6:05 pm EDT
This is ridiculous and it is going to be an uphill battle for Ashley Dupre and her legal team. By the way, the name “Dupre” is an adopted name- not her real surname. In my view, she is probably the one cyber-squatting here because as a wananbe-singer she probably took the name ‘Dupre’ to mimic and with hope that Jermaine Dupri’s success would rob off on her. Jermaine Dupri is Janet Jackson’s fiancé and a mega rapper/super producer behind several hits such, as from Lil Wayne, Mariah Carey, TI, Da Brat and other.
Another legal question is that: Does she have the name trademarked?
This could just be a stunt from a ’slut’ who is looking for cheap publicity.
fx
May 13, 2008 @ 7:01 pm EDT
she’s used the name “Ashley Dupre” in commerce. Most totably to sell over $1m worth of her songs on that music site. Point is, her name doesnt neet to be trademark to have acquired distrinctive rights and protection.
David
May 15, 2008 @ 1:32 am EDT
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001129—-000-.html
David
May 15, 2008 @ 1:35 am EDT
Forgot to add this:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001125—-000-.html