Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleWeb site owner denies New York-New York allegations
Wednesday, Nov. 11, 2009 | 5:48 p.m.
Sun Archives
A Web site owner on Wednesday denied allegations in a lawsuit that his www.newyorknewyork.com Internet site was infringing on the trademarks of the New York-New York hotel-casino in Las Vegas.
Ronnie Katzin of Tarzana, Calif., who was sued by the hotel-casino last week, said that after learning of the lawsuit he removed from the Web site an image of the Las Vegas hotel.
Katzin said he obtained the Web site name in about 1996, before the Las Vegas property opened. He obtained the domain name as part of a plan for a site promoting New York City, he said.
The name relates to the Frank Sinatra song, not the Las Vegas hotel, he said.
"I have a passion for creating a New York City site," Katzin said.
Assertions by New York-New York hotel-casino in the lawsuit that it contacted the domain name owner with its concerns don't apply to him, but to a company that hijacked the name and used it between 2004 and 2006, Katzin said.
Katzin said that prior to learning of the lawsuit, he was unaware the Las Vegas hotel and its owner MGM Mirage had a problem with the site.
"I had no knowledge this was something they were frowning upon," he said.
He felt he was doing the New York-New York hotel-casino a favor by including the hotel image on the site, since many users of the site reached it mistakenly thinking they were going to the hotel-casino's official site, Katzin said.
Katzin said that the image of the hotel-casino linked to a room-booking engine operated by Expedia's Interactive Affiliate Network. He said that since Interactive Affiliate Network has a deal to sell MGM Mirage rooms, the link was authorized.
He added that an MGM Mirage official, whom he refused to identify, had at one point said such a link would be authorized once the Interactive Affiliate Network started booking rooms for MGM Mirage.
Katzin's Web site on Wednesday still allowed users to book rooms throughout the country. In Las Vegas, properties showing up on a search for Dec. 2 included those owned by both MGM Mirage and competitors.
Discussion: comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
No trusted comments have been posted.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- UNLV can move forward without the burden of losing streak to San Diego State
- A wife’s wisdom shows birth control issue needn’t be divisive
- Surprise links, negotiated deals addressed by commissioners
- Motorcycle accident claims life of man in northeast valley
- Hope and change and … what’s missing?
- New York mayor has the right idea
- We don’t need a CEO in charge
- Paying our own way
- Country has ‘given’ citizens a lot
- Jerry Tarkanian: Mike Moser impresses yet again on a day to remember former Rebel greats
Blogs
The Kats Report
Color from scene at Thomas & Mack: We have a wire job! Rebels win, and Louie Armstrong sings!
South Point owner Michael Gaughan's take on 'Vegas Stripped': 'I'll give it an 8' (4 Comments)
Author relishes writing the life story of ‘larger-than-life’ Oscar Goodman (3 Comments)
Elsewhere
Landowner: All roads could lead to Uxbridge casino
Revel reveals smoke-free casino opening
Cirque du Soleil show in Sands China casino to close this month
Meet the woman behind Sheldon Adelson
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Okay so the website owner shouldn't be allowed to profit from the use of their image etc but he's entitled to do whatever he wants with his property (the web address).
The MGM DOESN'T OWN THE PHRASE "NEW YORK-NEW YORK". Who do they think they are? Throw this arrogance out of court!
More than likely MGM wants the domain name and approached him at some point in the past to buy it and he asked for $1M (people always ask for $1M for good names). By suing him they hope to force him to settle the case by letting them buy the name for something significantly less than what he originally wanted. Companies do it all the time to get prime domains.
They're using the legal system as a bargaining chip.
This guy didn't ask for any money, if he had, MGM would have put it in their suit (I have read it).
The big bad MGM is only going after the little guy from the looks of it to me.
He used their legal trademark to make money.
They have to protect their trademark, that is the law.
He had not right to use it without their consent. Pretty simple really.
There are 1000's of people on the net trying to make a buck off others trademarks and hard work. It is a good thing that MGM is stepping up to help stop it.
If it was your trademark you would do the same.
@Vegaslee - He was using the name to sell rooms/shows/tours in New York city, that was the emphasis of the site. That was completely within his rights. Where things went south was when he put a link on the site for NYNY Hotel Casino in Vegas as well, something he did merely as a convenience to visitors that thought thought they were going to get thew Vegas hotel, and got a site promoting New York city instead.
MGM is taking advantage of the situation, pure and simple.