Court rules on journalist's attempt to wrest doman name from critic [fs]

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

Michael Lewittes, Plaintiff, -against- Jamie Cohen, Joshua Blume, and 
Marilyn Blume, Defendants.

03 Civ. 189 (CSH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

May 24, 2004, Decided
May 26, 2004, Filed

...

According to the Third Amended Complaint (the "Complaint"), plaintiff, 
Michael Lewittes, [*3]  is a journalist and editor who specializes in 
celebrity reporting, a screenwriter, and a commentator who frequently 
appears on national television programs. Defendant Marilyn Blume, 
formerly known as Marilyn Lewittes, was once married to plaintiff's 
brother, David Lewittes. Defendant Joshua Blume, also known as Jamie 
Cohen, is Marilyn Blume's brother. In March 2000, Marilyn Blume was in 
the midst of divorce proceedings against David Lewittes, who is not a 
party to the present action.

On or about March 30, 2000, Marilyn Blume, with the aid and support of 
Joshua Blume, registered the domain named "www.lewittes.com" and created 
a website lodged at that location. n1 When accessed, one incarnation n2 
of this website promised to provide details, including documents and 
subjective accounts, relating to the divorce proceedings involving 
Marilyn Blume and David Lewittes. While the website was, apparently, 
never completed, one page that was available at the site featured a 
title in bold and large font text reading "the story will be told," 
accompanied by a statement in smaller font reading "ask the doorman ... 
and that closeted editor of a certain paper" (ellipsis in original). In 
addition,  [*4]  this same page displayed a statement reading "soon to 
be a major motion picture ..." (ellipsis in original). The page also 
contained links labeled "women," "jewish," and "and one more," none if 
which, it seems, was active. A later version of the site, n3 created on 
or about June 24, 2002, claimed, simply, that the site was "currently 
under development," invited "comments," and incorporated links labeled 
"cnn," "nyl," and "post."

...

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court makes the following Order:

1. Plaintiff's motion to file his Third Amended Complaint is granted 
nunc pro tunc. Its allegations relate back to the filing of the first 
complaint on January 9, 2003.

2. Plaintiff's first, second, and sixth causes of action are dismissed 
without prejudice.

3. Defendants' motions to dismiss plaintiff's third, fourth, and fifth 
causes of action are denied.

4. The stay on discovery in this case imposed by this Court's Order 
dated March 9, 2004 is lifted. The parties are ordered to proceed with 
discovery in accordance with the Civil Case Management Plan stipulated 
to by the parties and endorsed by the Court on March 22, 2004.

Dated: May 24, 2004

CHARLES S. HAIGHT, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)