HOME VESTORS ATTORNEY SENT ME A CERTIFIED LETTER

Flipper/Rehabber · Charlotte, NC · Member since 2010 · 241 posts · 127 votes

Today the mail lady came to give me a certified letter. I signed for it and opened it immediately. It was a letter from Homevestor's attorney. The attorney stated that I was in violation of Unauthorized use of Intellectual property. Apparently on my site. I am not allowed to use "We buy ugly houses" as a meta tag on my site. Yes you read that correctly a Meta tag on my site. Has this happened to any one before?

0 Reply

151 views

Most Popular Reply

Account Closed

Investor · Central Valley, CA · Member since 2012 · 6k+ posts · 3k+ votes

12y

Originally posted by @Duncan Taylor:

Originally posted by @Account Closed:

Originally posted by @Jon Holdman:

Here's at least one lawsuit Homevestors won:
‘We Buy Ugly Houses’ franchisor wins domain name dispute
Here's the official site for trademarks in the US:

Trademarks Home

You can run a search here if you wish to see if this phrase is a truly a registered trademark. Trademarks are a legitimate piece of intellectual property and they have real value. Companies spend significant money on "branding" to promote their trademarks. Many lawsuits have been fought and won over someone using someone else' trademark inappropriately. Trademark owners are required to vigioursly defend their trademarks or else they can lose control of them. Regardless of whether you think this is right or not, it is the law. Using someone's trademark without their permission is almost certain to result in legal action agaist you and if you fight that you will lose.

That trademark search is amazing. HomeVestors trademarked 'em all. I/we buy ugly houses, I love ugly houses, I heart ugly houses, We buy the good bad and the ugly.....they already got there.

Somebody took my whole paragraphs of marketing copy and used it word for word in their ads and letters. I just assumed there was nothing I could do about it. Makes me wonder if I should trade mark some of it.

You couldn't trademark your paragraphs nor your entire marketing copy. However, if you could prove your first use date preceded theirs, you could assert your copyrights. You do not have to declare a copyright, it is implied and enforceable in the US.

Of course. I should know the difference between trademark and copyright. I told one guy who lifted my copy exactly that it was copyrighted and to stop using it. He pulled it from my website or maybe from my craigslist ads (which link to my website). I mean, the bullet points, the paragraphs, exact same punctuation. At first he pulled it down. But he put it back and and all he did was change it from 2nd person to 3rd person. Today I found two other investors using the material. Oh well.

There's a six word tag I use that might be worth trademarking though. Almost as good as We Buy Ugly Houses, but with a twist. :)

2 Reply

See this reply in the discussion

51 Replies

Jump to latestLatest

Sort by

Brian L.
Wholesaler · Westminster, CO · Member since 2014 · 309 posts · 104 votes
12y
So they're claiming that "we buy ugly houses" is their intellectual property? Interesting. Well I don't know about you, but I don't mess with lawyers, I would change it. Go with We buy awful houses or We love buying ugly houses or something like that. Don't mess with them lawyers man...
0 Reply
Joel OwensBusiness Member
Moderator
Real Estate Broker · Canton, GA · Member since 2010 · 15k+ posts · 11k+ votes
12y
Nasar if you go to their website you will see that phrase is protected.

Look at the sign and you will see a copyright or trademark symbol by the words.

Ugly Houses

So unless you want a huge corp that has been around a long time coming after you then probably should get rid of this right away. The attorney letter is their way of asking nicely before they drop the hammer on you....... : )
Podcast Guest on Show #47
NNN Invest53 Reviews
Website View Page
1 Reply
Kevin Perk
Rental Property Investor · Memphis, TN · Member since 2011 · 111 posts · 40 votes
12y
Yep, "Ugly Houses" is their property and you have experienced a shot across the bough so to speak.

I would think of another catch phrase if I were you.
0 Reply
Account Closed
Real Estate Investor · Chicago, IL · Member since 2008 · 1k+ posts · 218 votes
12y
They have the rights to the "Phrase" but they do not have the rights to the words. Just change the order. Ugly Houses We Buy.

They will not be able to come after you for that. How about We buy the good bad and the ugly?

@Nasar Elarabi
1 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
I am going to disagree here. Not with the above advice but rather as a legal matter. And about 50% of the legal cases disagreed as well. Simply put, they don't own the phrase as used in sentence. I am not an attorney. For legal sake until counciled otherwise perhaps use the phrase " I like to buy ugly houses and we like to buy ugly houses"

What it basically boils down to ....are you stating a fact or trying to confuse the customer as to make them think you are that other company. Many of these cases have been initially won for plaintiff and reversed on appeal.

There was a case where Coke was suing Pepsi as Coke was suing anyone using the word Cola. Eventually, it was ruled that the cola trademark was a descriptive term and could not be held or used exclusively by one concern. Your case is nearly identical.

thanks,

Matt
0 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
Ok, so "we buy really ugly houses in North Carolina now"
0 Reply
Paul Granneman
Investor · Colorado Springs, CO · Member since 2013 · 80 posts · 26 votes
12y
Most IP lawsuits are ridiculous these days. It is sad when there are whole companies who do not try to produce anything, but instead just sue other companies and make money by patent trolling...
0 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
As I did some more research on some of my own domains. I am convinced that a generic descriptive term would not have a chance of holding up to legal scrutiny as an enforceable trademark. One of the known rules is no generic descriptive terms.

The sky is blue

2+2=4

We buy ugly cars

None of these can be legally enforced as a trademark by only one concern.

Thanks,

Matt
0 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
As a practical matter, it does not mean someone would stop from suing. Coke spent years and big bucks trying to stop Pepsi. A lawyer worth his salt would advise accordingly however they would cutting their

own pay check and they usually don't do that.

Thanks,

Matt
0 Reply
Andy Luick
Real Estate Investor · atlanta, GA · Member since 2013 · 456 posts · 237 votes
12y
ahhhh and the real rub is ask the mail lady who the certified is from before signing for it. To the best of my recollection, nothing any good has ever come to me in certified mail.....certified funds, yes...but not mail.

As Matt noted, it's all based on confusing the consumer....are consumers going to be confused that you & your operation are really Homevestors? I don't think so but the practical matter is that they probably have deeper pockets than you do and while you are right in principle....principles get very expensive or "dear" as my grandmother use to say. Better to change it up a little bit and send them back a nice letter telling them you have done so. Happy Investing!
1 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
True that Andy. In my legal fantasy, it would be awesome to counter sue for civil racketeering (the interference of commerce) next time a big guy tries to bully the small guy. They would pay 3 times the damages plus cost.

Thanks,

Matt
1 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
If you could suppeana the documents, you will find they officially understand they have worthless unenforceable trademark. Which justifies the practice and pattern of civil racketeering counter claim. If only lawyers were free ...it would be all good fun.

Thanks,

Matt
0 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
Anecdotally, you will notice that some companies who use descriptive terms will do a servicemark sm. However servicemarks are typically limited to geographical locations or just one city that one services. You could do a servicemark in your city and that will help protect against a bogus generic wannabe trademark claim. I am not an attorney and I am not giving a legal opinion, these are merely stories that I have heard before:)
0 Reply
Jon Holdman
Rental Property Investor · Mercer Island, WA · Member since 2008 · 22k+ posts · 14k+ votes
12y
Here's at least one lawsuit Homevestors won:

‘We Buy Ugly Houses’ franchisor wins domain name dispute

Here's the official site for trademarks in the US:

Trademarks Home

You can run a search here if you wish to see if this phrase is a truly a registered trademark. Trademarks are a legitimate piece of intellectual property and they have real value. Companies spend significant money on "branding" to promote their trademarks. Many lawsuits have been fought and won over someone using someone else' trademark inappropriately. Trademark owners are required to vigioursly defend their trademarks or else they can lose control of them. Regardless of whether you think this is right or not, it is the law. Using someone's trademark without their permission is almost certain to result in legal action agaist you and if you fight that you will lose.
0 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
Good points Jon. That particular case is quite different than the above example however. That case it was clear that the defendant was creating confusion with merely adding a .biz or creating domain confusion. You can't just go into the same business with same name and add . biz. Trademark or not that is not legally kosher and borderline fraud.

In the OP matter, he simply had that phrase on his web page with no branding no confusion , no domain issues....simply just the words on a page stated as fact.

Thanks,

Matt
0 Reply
Jon Holdman
Rental Property Investor · Mercer Island, WA · Member since 2008 · 22k+ posts · 14k+ votes
12y

Sorry @Matt R. but that's not what @Nasar Elarabi said:

A meta tag is a bit of text embedded into the .html file that's being used to render what you see. They're not directly visible in what you see in your browser. Meta tags can be used to try to improve a sites hits by search engines for specific terms. Putting "we buy ugly houses" into a meta tag on a page would specifically be intended to drive a search for "we buy ugly houses" to that page. Using that phrase as a meta tag isn't as egregious as registering a domain name with that phrase, but it would still seem to me to be an illegitimate use of someone else' trademark. I can see why Homevestor's attorney would send that letter. And why I think Nasar will lose if he tries to take this to court.
0 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
Jon, I don't think trademark was principle in that dispute. First, the case was a domain dispute brought up before the domain registry. I think it was obvious that guy was hijacking another companies name and goodwill. It was not ruled in US court like trademark issues normally do. I don't see that case in the same arena. In the OP matter, we have a bully and small guy. The bully flexing muscle to intimidate the small guy to changing something that was fine to begin with.

Thanks in advance. I value your opinion.

Matt
1 Reply
Account Closed
Investor · Central Valley, CA · Member since 2012 · 6k+ posts · 3k+ votes
12y
Originally posted by @Jon Holdman:
Here's at least one lawsuit Homevestors won:

‘We Buy Ugly Houses’ franchisor wins domain name dispute

Here's the official site for trademarks in the US:

Trademarks Home

You can run a search here if you wish to see if this phrase is a truly a registered trademark. Trademarks are a legitimate piece of intellectual property and they have real value. Companies spend significant money on "branding" to promote their trademarks. Many lawsuits have been fought and won over someone using someone else' trademark inappropriately. Trademark owners are required to vigioursly defend their trademarks or else they can lose control of them. Regardless of whether you think this is right or not, it is the law. Using someone's trademark without their permission is almost certain to result in legal action agaist you and if you fight that you will lose.

That trademark search is amazing. HomeVestors trademarked 'em all. I/we buy ugly houses, I love ugly houses, I heart ugly houses, We buy the good bad and the ugly.....they already got there.

Somebody took my whole paragraphs of marketing copy and used it word for word in their ads and letters. I just assumed there was nothing I could do about it. Makes me wonder if I should trade mark some of it.
0 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
Jon, my Coke vs Pepsi example is the more accurate outcome if one had such resources to pursue. Coke used their muscle to sue dozens and dozens who used the term Cola. Everyone capitulated except Pespi. It took Pepsi many years for the courts to see it Pepsi's way. They would not give up and eventually won that case, I think rightfully so.

Thanks again,

Matt
0 Reply
Nasar Elarabi
OP
Flipper/Rehabber · Charlotte, NC · Member since 2010 · 241 posts · 127 votes
12y
I never said I wanted to fight with them. Just wanted others input.. I appreciate everybody feedback. I just changed the meta tag word. Will call them Monday to see if that is sufficient enough with out signing docs..
0 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
There is a reason why trademark attorneys suggest not trademarking generic terms and phrases. Ultimately, they are not legally defendable. That does not mean you won't get a letter someday from another attorney.

Thanks,

Matt
0 Reply
Nasar Elarabi
OP
Flipper/Rehabber · Charlotte, NC · Member since 2010 · 241 posts · 127 votes
12y
@ Matt Rosas I strongly agree with everything you said 100%
1 Reply
Matt R.
Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
12y
That's the practical business move for sure. I was the guy who sent the letter onetime but it was obvious hijack...he added the letter "s" or plural version of my domain.Much different in how you were bullied. I understand what's practical.

Good luck with the revised addition.

Thanks,

Matt
0 Reply
Account Closed
Dallas, TX · Member since 2013 · 4k+ posts · 744 votes
12y
It would be hard for HomeVestors to win a lawsuit in another country base on a trademark.

Joe Gore
0 Reply
John Rooster
Denver, CO · Member since 2013 · 409 posts · 105 votes
12y
nevermind
0 Reply

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.