Chilling Effects
Home Weather Reports Report Receiving a Cease and Desist Notice Search the Database Topics
Sending
Topic HomeFAQsMonitoring the legal climate for Internet activity
USF Law School - IIP Justice Project
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > Documenting Your Domain Defense > Notices > Infringement and Cybersquatting on CORNELLRENTALS.COM Printer-friendly version

 

Sender Information:
Cornell University
Sent by: [Private]
Nixon Peabody LLP Attorneys At Law
Rochester, NY, 14603-150, USA

Recipient Information:
[Private]
Welzie
Ithaca, NY, 14850, USA


Sent via: Mail
Re: Infringement and Cybersquatting on CORNELLRENTALS.COM

Dear Mr. [Private]:

I am contacting you on behalf of my client, Cornell University ("Cornell"). Further to [Private]'s December 3, 2002 correspondence to you, and Collegiate Licensing Company's letters to you of January 7, February 17, and March 6, 2003, your registration and use of the www.cornellrentals.com domain constitutes cybersquatting, trademark infringement, dilution, and unfair competition in violation of the Lanhan Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125, the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, 15 U.S.C.1125(d) and state and common law trademark provisions.

Cornell hereby reiterates its demand that you immediately transfer the www.cornellrentals.com domain to Cornell, and cease and desist from all unauthorized use of Cornell marks.

Please sign and return the enclosed Registrant Name Change Agreement within 10 business days of this letter, or I will advise my client to either file the enclosed complaint to initiate arbitration against you, or initiate litigation in which Cornell will seek any and all sanctions and attorneys' fees permissible.

Enclosed are the Complaint Transmittal Sheet, Complaint with attached Exibits, and Uniform Domain Dispute Resolution Policy.

Very Truly Yours,

[Private]

 
FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]


Question: If a UDRP Complaint is filed against me, what are some of the facts I should attempt to demonstrate in my Response?

Answer: A. That you are not a competitor.
B. That you have not tried to sell the domain name to Complainant, or anyone else.
C. That you have a legitimate business (or any other) purpose for using the mark.
D. That you are not making trademark use of the word or phrase in which Complainant has trademark rights i.e. that you are using the word in its ordinary, every day, meaning and not as an indicator of source.
E. That Complainant's rights do not extend to your use of the trademarked word or phrase.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA)?

Answer: The ACPA [codified as 15 USC 1125(d)] is aimed at people who register a domain name with the intention of taking financial advantage of another's trademark. For instance, if BURGER KING did not have a web site, and you registered www.BURGERKING.com with the intent of selling the site to BURGER KING for a royal ransom, you could be liable under ACPA.

ACPA applies to people who:
(1) have a bad faith intent to profit from a domain name; and
(2) register, use or traffic in a domain name;
(3) that is identical, confusingly similar, or dilutive of certain trademarks. The trademark does not have to be registered.

ACPA provides that cyberpirates can be fined between $1,000 and $100,000 per domain name for which they are found liable, as well as being forced to transfer the domain name.

Somewhat more broadly, the Act is meant to reduce consumers' confusion about the source and sponsorship of Internet web pages. The idea is to provide customers with a measure of reliability, so that when they visit www.burgerking.com, they will be able to find actual Burger King products, not something entirely different. It also protects mark owners from loss of customer goodwill that might occur if others used the trademark to market disreputable goods or services.

See the module on ACPA to find out more about bad faith and legitimate defenses.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is trademark infringement?

Answer: Although different courts have different tests, the central concept is confusion in the marketplace. The law protects against consumer confusion by ensuring that the marks on the same or similar products or services are sufficiently different. A plaintiff in a trademark infringement case generally must prove 1) it possesses a valid mark; 2) that the defendant used the mark; 3) that the defendant used the mark in commerce, "in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution or advertising "of goods and services; and 4) that the defendant used the mark in a manner likely to confuse consumers.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is trademark infringement?

Answer: Although different courts have different tests, the central concept is confusion in the marketplace. The law protects against consumer confusion by ensuring that the marks on the same or similar products or services are sufficiently different. A plaintiff in a trademark infringement case generally must prove 1) it possesses a valid mark; 2) that the defendant used the mark; 3) that the defendant used the mark in commerce, "in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution or advertising "of goods and services; and 4) that the defendant used the mark in a manner likely to confuse consumers.


[back to notice text]


Question: What civil and criminal liabilities may be imposed for trademark infringement?

Answer: Under federal law (Lanham Act Section 32), an infringer shall be liable in a civil action by the registrant for certain remedies provided in the Act.

One such remedy is an injunction, where a court orders a person who was found to violate the Act to stop its infringing activities.

A trademark owner/registrant may also be able to obtain lost profits or damages against a defendant in a civil action only if the acts were committed with knowledge that such imitation was intended to be used to cause confusion, mistake, or to deceive. The trademark owner can recover (1) the domain holder's profits from use of the mark, (2) the trademark owner's damages resulting from harm to the value of mark, and (3) court costs as "actual damages." In determining the award to be paid, the court can choose to award up to three times the amount of actual damages. Instead of having to prove the amount of "actual" damages suffered as above, the mark owner can instead request payment of "statutory damages" from $1000 and $100,000 per domain name.

Attorney fees may be awarded in exceptional circumstances, such as when there was a willful and malicious violation.

The court can order the cancellation or transfer of a domain registration.

In the case of a willful violation of Lanham Act section 43, a court may order that all labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles, and advertisements in the possession of a defendant bearing the registered trademark shall be delivered up and destroyed.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is trademark dilution?

Answer: A type of infringement of a famous trademark in which the defendant's use, while not causing a likelihood of confusion, tarnishes the image or blurs the distintiveness of the plaintiff's mark. For example, if someone tries to sell "KODAK" pianos, KODAK could stop the person--even if consumers were not confused--because "KODAK" is a famous mark, and its use on products other than film and film-printing accessories (or other products on which Eastman Kodak places the mark) dilutes its uniqueness.

Many states have anti-dilution laws. The federal government only recently enacted anti-dilution legislation; see the Federal Trademark Dilution Act at 15 USC 1125(c).


[back to notice text]


Question: What is unfair competition?

Answer: "Unfair competition" covers a wide range of kinds of unjust business behavior---so many kinds, in fact, that it is impossible to give one simple general definition. In essence, unfair competition means trademark infringement or false advertising to confuse the public. In most states, only commercial competitors can be engaged in "unfair competition."


[back to notice text]


Question: What is unfair competition?

Answer: "Unfair competition" covers a wide range of kinds of unjust business behavior---so many kinds, in fact, that it is impossible to give one simple general definition. In essence, unfair competition means trademark infringement or false advertising to confuse the public. In most states, only commercial competitors can be engaged in "unfair competition."


[back to notice text]


Question: I do not know what these cases or statutes cited in the C&D mean.

Answer: If your opponent has cited cases and statutes in the C&D, do not freak out. The fact that your opponent can include some legal authority in the C&D does not mean that the law is on its side. If you can, go look up the cases and statutes to see what they say. You can go to the nearest law school's law library for help, or you can try a free legal resource web site like Findlaw. Many of them are accessible on the Internet by keyword search using the full case name or it's citation (the numbers and abbreviations that follow the names of the parties).

If your opponent is relying on federal law, it will probably cite one or more of the following sections of the Lanham Act:
(1) section 32 (also known as section 1114);
(2) section 43(a) [a/k/a section 1125(a)]; or
(3) section 43(c) [a/k/a section 1125(c)]. (The smaller numbers indicate how the statutory sections were numbered when the law was a bill in Congress; the larger numbers indicate how the statutory sections were re-numbered when the law was codified in the U.S. Code. Under either numbering system, the laws say the same thing). An additional statute, the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) [a/k/a section 1125(d) relates specifically to domain names.

Section 32 (codified as 15 U.S.C. 1114) is the basic statute governing trademark infringement of registered marks. If you use a mark in commerce that is confusingly similar to a registered trademark, you may be civilly liable under section 32. This section describes how to determine infringement, what the remedies are, and what defenses are available.

Section 43(a) [codified as 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)] is the "false designation of origin" statute. If you use a mark in commerce that is likely to cause confusion or deception as to affiliation, association, origin, or sponsorship with another trademark, you may be civilly liable under section 43(a). Section 43(a) does not require that any of the marks be registered.

Section 43(c)[codified as 15 U.S.C. 1125(c)] is the "anti-dilution" provision. This section allows the owner of a famous trademark to prevent use of the mark by junior users whose use ?dilutes? the distinctive quality of the famous trademark. In other words, if someone tries to sell "KODAK pianos," KODAK could stop the person -- even if consumers were not confused -- because KODAK is a famous mark, and its use on products other than film and film-printing accessories (or other products on which Eastman Kodak places the mark) dilutes its uniqueness.

The ACPA [codified as 15 USC 1125(d) prohibits "cybersquatting" and lists the elements and defenses to a civil claim against a domain name holder.

If you identify the statutory provisions on which your opponent relies, you can begin to get a feel for whether the C&D has merit. For instance, if your opponent relies on section 32, but does not disclose a registration number, your first question is: does your opponent have a registered mark? If not, it has no claim under section 32.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA)?

Answer: The ACPA [codified as 15 USC 1125(d)] is aimed at people who register a domain name with the intention of taking financial advantage of another's trademark. For instance, if BURGER KING did not have a web site, and you registered www.BURGERKING.com with the intent of selling the site to BURGER KING for a royal ransom, you could be liable under ACPA.

ACPA applies to people who:
(1) have a bad faith intent to profit from a domain name; and
(2) register, use or traffic in a domain name;
(3) that is identical, confusingly similar, or dilutive of certain trademarks. The trademark does not have to be registered.

ACPA provides that cyberpirates can be fined between $1,000 and $100,000 per domain name for which they are found liable, as well as being forced to transfer the domain name.

Somewhat more broadly, the Act is meant to reduce consumers' confusion about the source and sponsorship of Internet web pages. The idea is to provide customers with a measure of reliability, so that when they visit www.burgerking.com, they will be able to find actual Burger King products, not something entirely different. It also protects mark owners from loss of customer goodwill that might occur if others used the trademark to market disreputable goods or services.

See the module on ACPA to find out more about bad faith and legitimate defenses.


[back to notice text]


Question: I registered the domain first. Why can't I keep it?

Answer: Maybe you can. The ACPA only protects trademark owners against cybersquatters. If your registration or use doesn't violate the Act, you should be able to keep the domain. However, being the first to register a name doesn't give you special rights or protections if you violate the law. Just as in physical space, you cannot use another's trademark to your own commercial advantage if the result is to "steal" the value of the trademark's goodwill and turn it to your own advantage. Read the remaining FAQs that explain what the ACPA actually forbids.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA)?

Answer: The ACPA [codified as 15 USC 1125(d)] is aimed at people who register a domain name with the intention of taking financial advantage of another's trademark. For instance, if BURGER KING did not have a web site, and you registered www.BURGERKING.com with the intent of selling the site to BURGER KING for a royal ransom, you could be liable under ACPA.

ACPA applies to people who:
(1) have a bad faith intent to profit from a domain name; and
(2) register, use or traffic in a domain name;
(3) that is identical, confusingly similar, or dilutive of certain trademarks. The trademark does not have to be registered.

ACPA provides that cyberpirates can be fined between $1,000 and $100,000 per domain name for which they are found liable, as well as being forced to transfer the domain name.

Somewhat more broadly, the Act is meant to reduce consumers' confusion about the source and sponsorship of Internet web pages. The idea is to provide customers with a measure of reliability, so that when they visit www.burgerking.com, they will be able to find actual Burger King products, not something entirely different. It also protects mark owners from loss of customer goodwill that might occur if others used the trademark to market disreputable goods or services.

See the module on ACPA to find out more about bad faith and legitimate defenses.


[back to notice text]


Question: Who can use the ACPA?

Answer: The owner of any trademark protected under US federal law, whether registered or not, so long as the mark

  1. is distinctive at the time of registration of the domain name, or
  2. is a famous mark at the time of registration, or
  3. is a "mark, word or name" that is protected because it is reserved for use by the Red Cross or the U.S. Olympic Committee.


[back to notice text]


Question: How does the ACPA apply to domain names?

Answer: It makes it illegal to register, "traffic in" or use a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a distinctive or famous mark (or which dilutes a famous mark).


[back to notice text]


Question: What constitutes a violation of the Act?

Answer: In addition to having a domain name that steps on the toes of an existing trademark as mentioned above, a person will be held liable only if he or she has a "bad faith intent to profit from the mark, including a personal name which is protected as a mark." An example of a personal name that is protected as a mark would be the name of a Hollywood celebrity whose name is used as a trademark to identify his or her performance services.


[back to notice text]


Question: Where can I find state trademark law?

Answer: Each state has its own laws governing use of trademarks within its borders. To locate the trademark laws of the 50 states, use the Legal Information Institute links. Both legislation and court opinions create trademark rights and remedies.

If marks are used in interstate commerce, then federal law will also apply.


[back to notice text]


Question: What are "common law" rights in a trademark?

Answer: Common law rights are those that are recognized by courts as a matter of traditional equitable principles and fairness, even when there is no statute or other law that has been enacted by the legislative branch of government to cover the situation. It also arises from the leeway that judges have in interpretating the language of the written laws when the meaning is not clear. Common law is often known as "judge-made" law. Common law is learned by reading the actual decisions made by courts.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is a trademark?

Answer: A trademark is a "mark" (word, phrase, symbol, design, mark, device, or combination thereof) used to identify the source of a product. Trademarks allow consumers to evaluate products before purchase.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is this laundry list of things the C&D says will happen if I don't obey?

Answer: Your opponent may describe a parade of horribles to demonstrate with exquisite detail what it will do to you unless you capitulate. This list generally includes, but is not limited to:
(1) ceasing use of the allegedly infringing mark or surrendering the domain name;
(2) rendering an accounting;
(3) posting corrective advertising;
(4) obtaining an injunction;
(5) recovering costs and fees.

Though these things sound awful, they are not medieval tortures (although that may be a function of the fact that Torquemada never thought of them).

Ceasing use of the mark is self-explanatory: your opponent wants you to stop using the mark. Your opponent might also ask you to surrender your domain name if they believe the domain name causes (or is likely to cause) confusion with their trademark. For example, under ICANN rules (the UDRP), you may have to surrender your domain name if the following three conditions are satisfied:
(1) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to your opponent?s;
(2) you have no legitimate right or interest in the name (in other words, you are not using the name to conduct a bona fide business or for non-commercial fair use purposes); and
(3) your name is registered and used in bad faith.

An accounting basically means that you disclose the following information to your opponent:
(1) the date you began using the allegedly infringing mark;
(2) the names of individuals who knew of the use when it began;
(3) the amount of traffic at your web site or business at your store; and
(4) your profits and revenues during the time you used the allegedly infringing mark.

Corrective advertising means you give notice to the public that you were using a mark confusingly similar to your opponent?s, and that you are not affiliated with your opponent.

An injunction is a judicial order to do something. An injunction can prevent you from using the allegedly infringing trademark.

Some provisions of the Lanham Act permit a trademark holder to recover attorney?s fees and court costs from an infringer.

That your opponent has listed these various remedies does not mean that it is entitled to them; do not confuse the smorgasbord of legal options with your opponent?s right to inflict any of them on you.


[back to notice text]


Question: If a UDRP Complaint is filed against me, what are some of the facts I should attempt to demonstrate in my Response?

Answer: A. That you are not a competitor.
B. That you have not tried to sell the domain name to Complainant, or anyone else.
C. That you have a legitimate business (or any other) purpose for using the mark.
D. That you are not making trademark use of the word or phrase in which Complainant has trademark rights i.e. that you are using the word in its ordinary, every day, meaning and not as an indicator of source.
E. That Complainant's rights do not extend to your use of the trademarked word or phrase.


[back to notice text]


Question: What are the UDRP and ACPA?

Answer: Follow these links for Frequently Asked Questions on the UDRP (Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy) or ACPA (Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act).


[back to notice text]


Question: What is the UDRP?

Answer: The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (?UDRP?) is an online procedure for resolving complaints made by trademark owners about domain names. It isn't a court nor is it an arbitration, but the authority that established it in 1999 (ICANN) has the power to order the deletion or transfer of domain names. ICANN requires the domain registrars in .biz, .com, .info, .org, and .net to abide by the results of UDRP proceedings. They must cancel or transfer a domain registration as a UDRP Panel directs. Domain holders agree to this procedure in their domain registration contracts.

The UDRP Policy explains what trademark owners have to prove in order to take a domain name away from the holder, as well as what domain name holders can use to show that they should be allowed to keep the domain registration.

The UDRP Rules outline the actual process for filing a complaint (if you are a trademark owner) and for responding to a complaint (if you are the domain name holder). The Policy and the Rules also explain some of the basics of the proceedings, such as how to chose a Provider, how Panels make their decisions, how the parties are notified of the outcome, what language will be used in the proceeding, the availability and effect of court proceedings, and the types of remedies available.

Each of the Providers also has its own Supplemental Rules to cover all the bases. The UDRP currently applies to .com, .org, .net, and a few country code top level domains (ccTLDs) including .ac, .mx, and .tv. It will soon apply to the new generic top level domains (gTLDs) .info and .biz.


[back to notice text]


Question: How can I lose a domain registration in a UDRP?

Answer: The trademark owner must prove three things: (1) that s/he has a trademark right that is identical or confusingly similar to your domain, (2) that you have no right or legitimate interest in the domain name, and (3) that you registered and used the domain in bad faith.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is a protectable "right or legitimate interest" in a domain name?

Answer: If the domain holder has a right or legitimate interest in the domain name, then s/he is entitled to keep it, under the UDRP. The Policy gives some examples of rights and legitimate interests, but the contestants and Panelists may develop others. The Policy recognizes a right if (a) you are commonly known by the domain name (as a personal or business name), (b) if you are using it for legitimate noncommercial or fair uses without intent to mislead consumers or tarnish the mark owner (for example if the term is being used to generically describe what the website is about, such as ?newyorknews?) or (c) if you were using the name in a bona fide effort to sell goods or services (or you can demonstrate that you were preparing to do so) before you had any notice of the trademark owner?s complaint.

The UDRP allows the Panelists to determine other circumstances of rights or legitimate interests on a case-by-case basis. Some of them have included the right to use the domain if you are a legitimate reseller of the marked goods, or acquired the domain before the trademark owner acquired trademark rights in the name.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is "bad faith" registration or use?

Answer: Facts that are considered as evidence of bad faith are described in the UDRP Policy. They include acquiring the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling or renting it to the mark owner (or the mark owner?s competitor) for money or other value that greatly exceeds the costs of the domain name. This is the typical situation that the courts have called "cybersquatting."

Another circumstance that will be considered evidence of bad faith is a pattern of registering domain names in order to prevent the mark owners from using their marks as domain names; also, if you register the domain name primarily to disrupt a competitor?s business. If you intentionally use the name in a manner that confuses or misleads users into believing that your site is affiliated with or endorsed by the mark owner, and you are getting commercial value from that confusion, you will also be considered as acting in bad faith.

Panelists are also allowed to determine whether other acts, not specified in the Policy, may also amount to bad faith. For example, false or inaccurate contact information on the registration is frequently considered evidence of bad faith.


[back to notice text]


Question: What are the consequences of the proceeding?

Answer: The Panel may cancel a domain name or order the transfer of the registration to the trademark owner or decide to leave the registration with the domain holder. If it cancels the domain registration, the domain will go back on the market for anyone to grab, so this is not an option that most trademark owners would request. If the domain name holder loses, the Registrar will wait 10 business days before implementing the Panel?s decision so that the domain name holder has the chance to file a lawsuit in court of law. If the domain name holder files a lawsuit, the Registrar will take no further action until it receives notice that the dispute was settled or that the lawsuit was dismissed or withdrawn.


Topic maintained by USF Law School - IIP Justice Project

Topic Frequently Asked Questions (and Answers)
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse - www.chillingeffects.org
disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts