CRS Recovery, Inc. v. Laxton

600 F.3d 1138 (2010)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
C
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

CRS Recovery, Inc. v. Laxton

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
600 F.3d 1138 (2010)

  • Written by Tammy Boggs, JD

Facts

Dale Mayberry (plaintiff), a Virginia citizen, registered a domain name, rl.com, and controlled rl.com through another domain and website, mat.net. At some point, Mayberry lost control of mat.net and accordingly also lost control of rl.com. Subsequently, Li Qiang (defendant) was able to register mat.net and transfer ownership of rl.com to himself. Qiang sold rl.com to John Laxton (defendant), who was a California citizen. Meanwhile, Mayberry discovered that he had lost control of both rl.com and mat.net. Mayberry assigned his interest in rl.com to CRS Recovery, Inc. (CRS) (plaintiff), a Virginia corporation. CRS and Mayberry sued Laxton, Qiang, and others in California district court, alleging theft of the two domain names. On summary judgment, Laxton urged the court to apply Virginia law, which assertedly did not recognize domain names as a form of intellectual property. Mayberry claimed that California law governed the matter. It was undisputed that California law recognized domain names as intangible personal property. The district court found that California law applied. Laxton appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Hawkins, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Conflict of Laws

Key Terms