Gateway Media v. NameCheap - Trademark Infringement Complaint PDF

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc.
#: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 1 of 15 PageID #: 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
GATEWAY MEDIA, LLC
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
) Case No.
)
NAMECHEAP, INC., WEB HOSTING INC., d/b/a ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
WEB-HOSTING.COM, and JOHN DOE,
)
)
Defendants.
COMPLAINT
COMES NOW Plaintiff Gateway Media, LLC (Plaintiff or Gateway Media), and for
its Complaint against Defendants NameCheap, Inc. (NameCheap), Web Hosting Inc. d/b/a
Web-Hosting.com (Web Hosting) and John Doe (Doe), respectfully states as follows:
Nature of Action
1.
This is an action for common law trademark infringement, unfair competition,
and false designation of origin and under the Federal Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051, et seq.
(the Lanham Act), and for trademark infringement and unfair competition under the laws of
the State of Missouri. Plaintiff seeks, among other things, preliminary and permanent injunctive
relief, damages, and other relief.
The Parties
2.
Gateway Media, LLC is a limited liability company organized and existing under
the laws of the State of Missouri, having a principal place of business at 190 Carondelet Plaza,
Suite 1200, Saint Louis, Missouri 63105, United States.
3.
Upon information and belief, Defendant NameCheap, Inc. is a Delaware
corporation with a principal place of business at 11400 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 200, Los
Angeles, California 90302 and is the registrar for the domain name at issue in this action.
Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 2 of 15 PageID #: 2
4.
Upon information and belief, Defendant Web Hosting Inc. d/b/a Web-
Hosting.Com., is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business at 11400 West

Olympic Boulevard, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 90302. Web Hosting is a part of the
Namecheap group of companies and, on information and belief, is the internet service provider
for the website at issue in this action.
5.
Upon information and belief, Defendant John Doe is an individual or group of
individuals of unknown residence and citizenship, and having an anonymous email address of
3cc306d50e9247138f363327001200e0.protect@whoisguard.com,
which
is
provided
by
NameCheaps WhoIsGuard service.

Jurisdiction and Venue
6.
This is an action for trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false
designation of origin arising under the Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. 1051, et. seq., as
amended (the Lanham Act), and for statutory and common law trademark infringement and
unfair competition under the laws of the state of Missouri.
7.
This Court has original jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338 and 15 U.S.C. 1121. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction
over the pleaded state law claims under 28 U.S.C. 1367(a). The court also has jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. 1332 as the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and
costs, and the dispute is between citizens of different states.
8.
Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391 because a
substantial part of property that is the subject of this action is situated in this judicial district, and
it is where Plaintiffs principal place of business and headquarters is located.
9.
On information and belief, this Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant
Doe through Does transactional ecommerce website (www.slashfilm.xyz) directed toward

residents of this District, the state of Missouri, and the entire United States of America.
10.
NameCheap through NameCheaps transactional ecommerce website (www.namecheap.com)

directed toward residents of this District, the state of Missouri, and the entire United States of
America.
11.
Web Hosting through Web Hostings transactional ecommerce website (www.web-hosting.com)

directed toward residents of this District, the state of Missouri, and the entire United States of
America.
Facts Common to All Counts
12.
Gateway Media, and its predecessors in interest, operate an entertainment news
forum under the brand CINEMABLEND. An example of Gateway Medias CINEMABLEND

mark and design is included below:
13.
The trademark CINEMABLEND is at least suggestive and is strong. Since the
inception of the company, the CinemaBlend website has grown to become one of the leading
entertainment news aggregators, both domestically and internationally.
14.
Gateway Media uses the CINEMABLEND trademark to promote its services and
Gateway Media is the owner of all right and interest to the CINEMABLEND trademark.
15.
Gateway Media has expended, and continues to expend, a substantial amount of
resources, money, time and effort promoting, marketing, advertising and building consumer
recognition and goodwill in its extremely valuable services under and in connection with its
well-known CINEMABLEND mark.
16.
Since at least as early as 2003, Gateway Media and its predecessors have
continuously owned the domain name registration for and has continuously used, operated, and
maintained a website located at www.cinemablend.com, which is used and accessed by millions
of people. See Exhibit A.
17.
Gateway Media also utilizes the slogan Entertainment You Care About (the
Slogan) in connection with the CinemaBlend website. See id.

18.
On December 11, 2015, Defendant John Doe and/or someone in privity with Doe
selected, adopted and registered the domain name www.slashfilm.xyz. See Exhibit B.
19.
NameCheap is the registrar for the www.slashfilm.xyz domain. See id.
20.
On information and belief, at approximately the same time as John Doe registered
the domain name www.slashfilm.xyz, John Doe and/or someone in privity with Doe also
subscribed to the WhoisGuard, Inc. service owned and provided by NameCheap. See id.
21.
WhoisGuard allows the domain name owner to avoid disclosing their name and
contact information to the public. Instead the registrant is listed as WhoisGuard. See id, showing
WhoisGuard as the registrant of www.slashfilm.xyz.
22.
On information and belief, prior to January 19, 2016, John Doe and/or someone in
privity with Doe developed website content to be placed on the www.slashfilm.xyz website. On
information and belief, the business purpose of www.slashfilm.xyz is to profit from illegal
internet streaming of counterfeit movies and TV shows. See Exhibit C.
23.
The content of www.slashfilm.xyz intentionally, and purposefully, infringes
Gateway Medias CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan.
Specifically, the source code of
www.slashfilmxyz intentionally contains infringing references to the CINEMABLEND Mark

and the Slogan. See Exhibit D, emphasis added to show infringing content. In particular, the
selected title for the home page is CINEMABLEND, Entertainment You Care About. See id.
Further, the bottom of the homepage attempts to associate the content of www.slashfilm.xyz with
CinemaBlend, reading Copyright (c) CINEMABLEND, Entertainment You Care About 2016.
See id.
24.
Gateway Media has not licensed, authorized, or otherwise consented to the use of
its trademark or Slogan by anyone connected with www.slashfilm.xyz.

25.
Defendant Doe and/or someone in privity with Doe improperly and illegally used
and are improperly using Gateway Medias intellectual property to intentionally mislead,
confuse, and deceive persons as to the source of the counterfeit videos available for download on
www.slashfilm.xyz.
26.
On information and belief, Web Hosting is the internet service provider for
www.slashfilm.xyz.
27.
Consumers, potential customers, and the relevant public are likely to be confused,
deceived, and misdirected by Does actions and, further, are likely to be confused, misled and
deceived into believing that www.slashfilm.xyz and Defendant Doe is the same as, affiliated
with, associated with, licensed by, and/or otherwise connected to or with Gateway Media.
28.
On January 19, 2016, Gateway Media, by and through its counsel, sent
correspondence demanding that the identified infringements be stopped to John Doe at the
ICANN
registered
email
address
of:
3cc306d50e9247138f363327001200e0.protect@whoisguard.com. See Exhibit E. No response

was ever received from Doe.
29.
On January 19, 2016, Gateway Media, by and through its counsel, submitted a
complaint via Defendant NameCheaps online support system explaining the nature of the
trademark infringement and requesting that the domain be suspended or cancelled. Gateway
Media attached sufficient evidence of the infringement occurring on www.slashfilm.xyz to its
submission to NameCheap. See Exhibit F.
30.
Other than NameCheaps system electronically acknowledging receipt of the
correspondence, NameCheap never responded to Gateway Medias January correspondence.

31.
On February 8, 2016, Gateway Media, by and through counsel, sent a second
letter to NameCheap and submitted the same to the electronic ticket system. See Exhibit G.
32.
NameCheap never responded to Gateway Medias February correspondence. Nor
has the electronic ticket even been assigned for internal review at NameCheap. See Exhibit H.
33.
On January 19, 2016, Gateway Media, by and through its counsel, sent
correspondence and submitted a complaint via Defendant Web Hostings online support system
explaining the nature of the trademark infringement, the violation of Web Hostings Terms of
Use and requesting that the hosted website be taken down. Gateway Media attached sufficient
evidence of the infringement occurring on www.slashfilm.xyz to its submission to Web Hosting.
See Exhibit I.
34.
Other than Web Hostings system electronically acknowledging receipt of the
correspondence, Web Hosting never responded to Gateway Medias January correspondence.

35.
On February 8, 2016, Gateway Media, by and through counsel, sent a second
letter to Web Hosting and submitted the same to the electronic ticket system. See Exhibit J.
36.
Web Hosting never responded to Gateway Medias February correspondence. Nor
has the electronic ticket even been assigned for internal review at Web Hosting. See Exhibit K.
37.
To date, Gateway Media has not received any response from any of the
Defendants regarding the infringements occurring on www.slashfilm.xyz.
COUNT I
Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin
Under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. 1125(a)) by John Doe
38.
Gateway Media realleges and incorporates each and every allegation set forth in
paragraphs 1 through 37 of the Complaint as if fully set forth and restated herein.
39.
Does unlicensed and otherwise unauthorized use of Plaintiffs CINEMABLEND
Mark and Slogan and confusingly similar variations thereof, on or in connection with Does
purported business and services is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive,
consumers and the relevant public into falsely believing that Doe is affiliated, connected, or
associated with Gateway Media, and/or the CINEMABLEND Mark.
40.
Mark and Slogan and confusingly similar variations thereof, on or in connection with Does
actions, purported business, and services is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to
deceive, consumers and the relevant public into believing that Gateway Media is: (i) the source
or origin of Does business, goods and/or services; (ii) sponsoring Does goods, business, and/or
services; (iii) approving Does business, goods and/or services; and/or (iv) otherwise affiliated
with Does business, goods and/or services.
41.
Mark and Slogan and confusingly similar variations thereof, on or in connection with their
advertising, marketing, and promotion of their goods and services, constitutes a false designation
of origin that wrongly suggests to the relevant purchasing public and consumers that such goods
and services emanate from, or are licensed, endorsed, approved, or sponsored by, or are in some
other way associated or connected with Gateway Media and/or the CINEMABLEND Mark and
Slogan.
42.
Doe has thus committed and is continuing to commit acts of unfair competition
and false designation of origin in interstate commerce in violation of, inter alia, Section 43(a) of
the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
43.
Does acts of unfair competition and false designation of origin have caused and
will continue to cause damage and irreparable harm to Gateway Media, and are likely to continue
unabated, thereby causing further damage and irreparable harm to Gateway Media and to the
valuable goodwill symbolized by and associated with its distinctive and well-known
CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan, unless enjoined and restrained by the Court.
44.
Gateway Media has no adequate remedy at law. If Does activities are not
enjoined, Gateway Media will continue to suffer irreparable harm and injury to its
CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan, its goodwill, and its reputation.
45.
Does unfair competition and false designation of origin is and was knowing and
46.
As a result of Does activities, Gateway Media has been damaged in an amount to
willful.
be ascertained at trial.
COUNT II
Contributory Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin Under Section 43(a)
of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. 1125) by NameCheap
47.
48.
Gateway Media is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to its
CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan, and all goodwill associated with and appurtenant thereto.
49.
By virtue of Plaintiffs multiple notifications to NameCheap of infringement of
Gateway Medias intellectual property, NameCheap has actual and constructive knowledge of
Does infringement occurring on the www.slashfilm.xyz domain registered and maintained by
NameCheap.
50.
Defendant Namecheap has supplied and continues to supply a service to
Defendant Doe and/or someone working in privity with Doe with knowledge that Defendant
Does conduct constitutes trademark infringement.
51.
Through the WhoisGuard service, Defendant Namecheap has enabled an
anonymous individual and/or persons working in privity with that individual to profit from
trademark infringement, acting in concert with them, profiting with them jointly in the process,
concealing their identity when challenged, and intentionally or recklessly continuing to supply
registration services to them with knowledge that they are engaged in trademark and service
mark counterfeiting or with willful blindness to that fact.
52.
Defendant NameCheap exercises control over the means of infringement by way
of its registration and anonymizing services.

53.
Defendant NameCheaps acts of contributory trademark infringement have caused
and will continue to cause damage and irreparable harm to Gateway Media, as well as the
relevant public, and are likely to continue unabated, thereby causing further damage and
irreparable harm to Gateway Media and the relevant public, and to the valuable goodwill
symbolized by and associated with Gateway Medias distinctive and well-known
54.
Gateway Media has no adequate remedy at law. If Defendant NameCheaps
activities are not enjoined, Gateway Media will continue to suffer irreparable harm and injury to
its CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan, its goodwill, and its reputation.
55.
Defendant NameCheaps contributory trademark infringement is and was
knowing and willful.

56.
As a result of Defendant NameCheaps activities, Gateway Media has been
damaged in an amount to be ascertained at trial.

COUNT III
Contributory Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin Under Section 43(a)
of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. 1125) by Web Hosting
57.
58.
Gateway Media is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to its
CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan, and all goodwill associated with and appurtenant thereto.
10
59.
By virtue of Plaintiffs multiple notifications to Web Hosting of infringement of
Gateway Medias intellectual property, Web Hosting has actual and constructive knowledge of
Does infringement occurring on the www.slashfilm.xyz website hosted by Web Hosting.
60.
Defendant Web Hosting has supplied and continues to supply a service to
Defendant Doe and/or someone working in privity with Doe with knowledge that Defendant
Does use of the service constitutes trademark infringement.
61.
Defendant Web Hosting has enabled an unknown individual and/or persons
working in privity with that individual to profit from trademark infringement, acting in concert
with them, profiting with them jointly in the process, concealing their identity, and intentionally
or recklessly continuing to supply internet service provider services to them with knowledge that
they are engaged in trademark and service mark counterfeiting or with willful blindness to that
fact.
62.
Defendant Web Hosting exercises control over the means of infringement by way
of its internet service provider services.

63.
Defendant Web Hostings acts of contributory trademark infringement have
caused and will continue to cause damage and irreparable harm to Gateway Media, as well as the
relevant public, and are likely to continue unabated, thereby causing further damage and
irreparable harm to Gateway Media and the relevant public, and to the valuable goodwill
symbolized by and associated with Gateway Medias distinctive and well-known
64.
Gateway Media has no adequate remedy at law. If Defendant Web Hostings
activities are not enjoined, Gateway Media will continue to suffer irreparable harm and injury to
its CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan, its goodwill, and its reputation.
11
65.
Defendant Web Hostings contributory trademark infringement is and was
knowing and willful.

66.
As a result of Defendant Web Hostings activities, Gateway Media has been
damaged in an amount to be ascertained at trial.

COUNT IV
Statutory and Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition by All
Defendants
67.
68.
The CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan are distinctive within the meaning of
Chapter 417 of the Missouri Revised Statutes and have been distinctive since prior to
Defendants conduct as described herein. CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan are valid at
common law.
69.
The CINEMABLEND Mark has been used in interstate and intrastate commerce,
including in Missouri, since at least as early as 2003.

70.
The Slogan has been used in interstate and intrastate commerce, including in
Missouri, since 2013.

71.
Defendants conduct constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition
under Chapter 417 of the Missouri Revised Statutes and under common law.
72.
Defendants acts of trademark infringement and unfair competition have caused
and will continue to cause damage and irreparable harm to Gateway Media, and are likely to
continue unabated, thereby causing further damage and irreparable harm to Gateway Media and
to the valuable goodwill symbolized by and associated with its distinctive and well-known and
12
73.
Gateway Media has no adequate remedy at law. If Defendants activities are not
enjoined, Gateway Media will continue to suffer irreparable harm and injury to its
CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan, its goodwill, and its reputation.
74.
Defendants trademark infringement and unfair competition is and was knowing
and willful.
75.
As a result of Defendants activities, Gateway Media has been damaged in an
amount to be ascertained at trial.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Gateway Media, LLC respectfully requests that the Court enter
judgment against Defendants NameCheap, Inc., Web Hosting Inc., and John Doe as follows:
A.
That the Court enter a preliminary injunction during the pendency of this action,
and a permanent injunction thereafter, restraining Defendant Doe and his respective employees,
partners, officers, directors, agents, representatives, attorneys, successors, and assigns, and all
persons in active concert or participation with any of them, from using the CINEMABLEND
Mark and Slogan and/or any confusingly similar variations thereof, in any manner or form, or
any other reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation of such mark, either alone or in
combination with any other designation, on or in connection with any activities, advertising,
marketing, promotion, business, provision of services, offer for sale, or sale of Defendant Does
services or goods, including filing applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or
other governmental entities to register such marks and/or registering domain names
incorporating such marks, from otherwise infringing the CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan,
and from otherwise competing unfairly with Gateway Media.
13
B.
and a permanent injunction thereafter, requiring that Defendant NameCheap and its respective
employees, partners, officers, directors, agents, representatives, attorneys, successors, and
assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with any of them, deactivate the domain
name www.slashfilm.xyz or take other steps to ensure that the domain name is not and cannot be
used by Defendant Doe.
C.
and a permanent injunction thereafter, requiring that Defendant Web Hosting and its respective
employees, partners, officers, directors, agents, representatives, attorneys, successors, and
assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with any of them, halt internet service
provider services for the website at www.slashfilm.xyz.
D.
That the Court enter a judgment finding that Defendant NameCheap, Inc., Web
Hosting Inc., and Defendant Doe have infringed and willfully infringed Plaintiffs
CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan;
E.
That the Court enter a judgment finding that Defendant NameCheap, Inc., Web
Hosting Inc., and Defendant Doe have committed unfair competition and false designation of
origin by willfully using Plaintiffs CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan.
F.
That the Court order Defendant NameCheap, Inc., Web Hosting Inc., and
Defendant Doe to pay to Plaintiff such damages as Plaintiff have actually sustained:
(i)
in consequence of Defendants infringement of and upon Plaintiffs

CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan;
(ii)
in consequence of Defendants false designations of origin; and
(iii)
in consequence of Defendants actions of unfair competition.
14
G.
Defendant Doe to cease further infringing the CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan and damaging
Plaintiffs goodwill;
H.
Defendant Doe to account for and pay to Plaintiff all profits realized by Defendants from their
infringement of or upon Plaintiffs CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan, their false designations
of origin, their acts of unfair competition;
I.
That the Court find that the circumstances and actions of Defendants conduct
was willful and sufficient to merit an award of exemplary damages to Plaintiff in the amount of
three times the amount found as actual damages;
J.
That the Court order Defendants to pay Plaintiff its costs and expenses incurred in
and related to this action;

K.
That the Court order Defendants to pay Plaintiffs attorneys fees; and that the
Court award such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper under the
circumstances.
Respectfully submitted,
POLSINELLI PC
By: /s/ Keith J. Grady ___________________________
KEITH J. GRADY (MO #46757)
ROBYN H. AST-GMOSER (MO #59236)
100 S. Fourth Street, Suite 1000
St. Louis, MO 63102
Telephone: (314) 889-8000
Facsimile: (314) 231-1776
kgrady@polsinelli.com
rastgmoser@polsinelli.com
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF GATEWAY
MEDIA, LLC
15

Gateway Media v. NameCheap - Trademark Infringement Complaint PDF

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Gateway Media v. NameCheap - Trademark Infringement Complaint PDF

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc.

#: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 1 of 15 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

This is an action for common law trademark infringement, unfair competition,

Upon information and belief, Defendant NameCheap, Inc. is a Delaware

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 2 of 15 PageID #: 2

Hosting.Com., is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business at 11400 West

Upon information and belief, Defendant John Doe is an individual or group of

NameCheaps WhoIsGuard service.

This is an action for trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false

Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391 because a

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 3 of 15 PageID #: 3

Doe through Does transactional ecommerce website (www.slashfilm.xyz) directed toward

NameCheap through NameCheaps transactional ecommerce website (www.namecheap.com)

Web Hosting through Web Hostings transactional ecommerce website (www.web-hosting.com)

Gateway Media, and its predecessors in interest, operate an entertainment news

forum under the brand CINEMABLEND. An example of Gateway Medias CINEMABLEND

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 4 of 15 PageID #: 4

The trademark CINEMABLEND is at least suggestive and is strong. Since the

Gateway Media has expended, and continues to expend, a substantial amount of

Slogan) in connection with the CinemaBlend website. See id.

NameCheap is the registrar for the www.slashfilm.xyz domain. See id.

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 5 of 15 PageID #: 5

The content of www.slashfilm.xyz intentionally, and purposefully, infringes

Gateway Medias CINEMABLEND Mark and Slogan.

Specifically, the source code of

www.slashfilmxyz intentionally contains infringing references to the CINEMABLEND Mark

its trademark or Slogan by anyone connected with www.slashfilm.xyz.

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 6 of 15 PageID #: 6

3cc306d50e9247138f363327001200e0.protect@whoisguard.com. See Exhibit E. No response

Other than NameCheaps system electronically acknowledging receipt of the

correspondence, NameCheap never responded to Gateway Medias January correspondence.

On February 8, 2016, Gateway Media, by and through counsel, sent a second

NameCheap never responded to Gateway Medias February correspondence. Nor

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 7 of 15 PageID #: 7

Other than Web Hostings system electronically acknowledging receipt of the

correspondence, Web Hosting never responded to Gateway Medias January correspondence.

On February 8, 2016, Gateway Media, by and through counsel, sent a second

Web Hosting never responded to Gateway Medias February correspondence. Nor

Defendants regarding the infringements occurring on www.slashfilm.xyz.

Does unlicensed and otherwise unauthorized use of Plaintiffs CINEMABLEND

Does unlicensed and otherwise unauthorized use of Plaintiffs CINEMABLEND

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 8 of 15 PageID #: 8

Does unlicensed and otherwise unauthorized use of Plaintiffs CINEMABLEND

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 9 of 15 PageID #: 9

As a result of Does activities, Gateway Media has been damaged in an amount to

By virtue of Plaintiffs multiple notifications to NameCheap of infringement of

Defendant Namecheap has supplied and continues to supply a service to

Through the WhoisGuard service, Defendant Namecheap has enabled an

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 10 of 15 PageID #: 10

Defendant NameCheap exercises control over the means of infringement by way

of its registration and anonymizing services.

Defendant NameCheaps acts of contributory trademark infringement have caused

Gateway Media has no adequate remedy at law. If Defendant NameCheaps

Defendant NameCheaps contributory trademark infringement is and was

knowing and willful.

As a result of Defendant NameCheaps activities, Gateway Media has been

damaged in an amount to be ascertained at trial.

Case: 4:16-cv-00490 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 04/08/16 Page: 11 of 15 PageID #: 11

By virtue of Plaintiffs multiple notifications to Web Hosting of infringement of

Defendant Web Hosting has supplied and continues to supply a service to

Defendant Web Hosting has enabled an unknown individual and/or persons