by Structured Settlement Watchdog
Do the parasitic calls to action using a third party’s key words in URL’s and page titles, serving to draw Internet traffic to the principal of Sovereign Funding Group give rise to a legally actionable claim?
I’m interested in hearing from intellectual property lawyers and opening this up to a public debate, because the principal of the offending party seems unwilling to address the issue that affects many.
Significant players in the structured settlement industry have seen Google seach results blighted by line items that purport to be about these victims’ companies. Intead they lead to webuypayments.net, which appears to be connected to Sovereign Funding Group
- At the time of original publication, Sovereign Funding Group’s website indictaed that it works with consumers to buy or arrange investor purchases of structured settlement payment rights.
- The toll-free number listed on the site doesn’t belong to the affected individual or entity but instead directs to a recording of David Springer’s voice.
- I spoke with Sovereign Funding Group principal David Springer about this issue over a month ago, yet it seems the problem continues to grow to almost absurd proportions.
- Today I discovered that J.G. Wentworth has been violated and is to be added to the list of prominent industry victims.
Download JG Wentworth structured settlements We Buy Payments Confusion September 30, 2011
In 2006 J.G Wentworth sued Peachtree Settlement Funding over the latter’s use of JG Wentworth in its Google Adwords campaign
(see J.G. Wentworth, S.S.C. Limited Partnership v. Settlement Funding LLCE.D.Pa, 2007) Download Memorandum of Law and Order JG wentworth-peachtree-keyword-lawsuit) The case highlighted significant disagreements among the courts and the need for better laws defining permissible business practices on the Internet. J.G. Wentworth, which later merged with its then adversary, lost the case
The Lanham Act prohibits the use “in commerce” of protected rights “in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of any goods or services,” or “in connection with any goods or services.” 15 U.S.C. Sections 1114(1) and 1125(a)(1).
The court’s considerations in the JG Wentworth v Settlment Funding (Peachtree) case in 2007
- Found that Peachtree’s participation in Google’s AdWords program and Peachtree’s incorporation of Wentworth’s marks in Peachtree’s keyword meta tags did constitute trademark use under the Lanham Act;
- Agreed with Wentworth that “initial interest confusion” is actionable under the Lanham Act;
- Acknowledged, but “respectfully” disagreed with, conflicting authority from other circuits;
- Specifically disagreed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and cited its decision in Brookfield Communications, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp as “a mischaracterization of the operation of internet search engines”;
- Reasoned that at no point are potential consumers “taken by a search engine” to Peachtree’s website due to Peachtree’s use of Wentworth’s trademarks in meta tags;
- Emphasized instead that a link to Peachtree’s website “appears on the search results page as one of many choices for the potential consumer to investigate”;
- Noted that Wentworth did not allege that Peachtree’s advertisements and links incorporate Wentworth’s marks in any way discernible to internet users and potential customers Source: Beyond Structured Settlements
What is happening in 2011 is different. Consider the contemporaneous search engine results pages for a JG Wentworth search
- Find out here! J.G. Wentworth structured settlements
- Learn About J.G. Wentworth Buyout Number at Virginia
- J.G.Wentworth structured settlements Montana Get the details
- Everything on J.G. Wentworth structured settlement buyout number (Emphasis ours)
My observations
- These all represent calls to action. In particular #4 the search result falsely implies to any reasonable person that the structured settlement number on the linked website is J.G. Wentworth’s number when it actually reaches the voice mail of competitor Sovereign Funding’s David Springer. Upon information and belief David Springer is not with J.G. Wentworth.
- Through its memorable advertising JG Wentworth is BY FAR the most prominent name in structured settlement factoring (note as I previously written that the webuypayments.net parasitic phenomenon also affects companies such as MetLife, Pacific Life as well as other individuals and both large and small business entities)
- J.G. Wentworth & Company, Inc.,has held the registered trademark for “J.G. Wentworth” (Registration 214234) since March 10, 1998. Source: USPTO
- All the parasitic search results falsely imply that there is something to be delivered by or about JG Wentworth that does not get delivered when the user clicks through.
- Instead a user sees a website with limited information, nothing about J.G. Wentworth and a phone number that diverts the unsuspecting consumer to the voice mail of Sovereign Funding’s principal David Springer.
- J.G. Wentworth does not issue annuities. Thus It is reasonable to assume that whoever clicks through on the “J.G. Wentworth” (with exception of the structured settlement watchdog!) is likely interested in selling structured settlement payments and very likely has brand awareness of JG Wentworth due to its national advertising campaign that has cost it tens of millions of dollars!
Leave a Reply