FAQ: Questions and Answers

[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 do these registration numbers mean? or Why don?t I have any registration numbers in my C&D? Answer: Do not be led astray by the registration numbers: trademark rights in the United States arise from use of the mark in commerce, not from registering. However, both state and federal law can provide relief from trademark infringement. If your opponent has registered its mark on the Patent & Trademark Office?s register, then you know that litigation about the mark could occur in federal court. If your opponent has not included any registration numbers, you still could be sued in federal court, but your opponent might simply be relying on state law (or just trying to scare you). If the C&D does not reveal any registration numbers, you should ask if the marks are registered. If the opponent has included registration numbers, look them up on the Patent & Trademark Office's Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS). You can check the status of a trademark by entering the registration number into TESS's search engine. If your opponent's trademark is labeled "LIVE," then it is likely to be protected by federal law; if TESS labels the mark "ABANDONED," then you have reason to believe that federal law will not protect it (although even abandoned marks can garner protection in some instances). Pending trademark applications are also marked "LIVE", but they do not get a "Reg. Number" unless/until the registration issues. A Community Trade Mark (CTM) offers regional trademark protection throughout the European Union. The CTM database of registered marks is OAMI-Online. [back to notice text] Question: What can be protected as a trademark? Answer: You can protect names (such as company names, product names) domain names if they label a product or service images symbols logos slogans or phrases colors product design product packaging (known as trade dress) [back to notice text] Question: Does the product or service on which I am using the mark matter? Do dates matter? Answer: It matters if the mark is not famous. The C&D should disclose your opponent?s products and/or services and the date on which it commenced use of the allegedly infringed mark. This will help you guesstimate whether a likelihood of confusion between the marks exists. For instance, if your opponent uses ?opera? on truffles and you use "opera" on silk gloves, consumers are not likely to confuse the products. If the mark is determined by a court to be famous, however, confusion is irrelevant and [non-fair] use on any type of goods may be an infringement. The date on which your opponent began using the mark is significant because a junior (later) user cannot displace a senior (first) user in the senior user?s geographic region. In other words, if you have owned a chain of donut shops called "Lucky Donuts," with locations in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut since 1943, a national chain called "Lucky Donuts" founded in 1979 has no trademark infringement claim against you in the NJ-NY-CT tri-state area. If your opponent has begun using its allegedly infringed mark after your use, you have another reason to question the merit of the C&D. [back to notice text] Question: How was I supposed to know that my domain violates somebody else?s rights? Answer: It is the domain name registrant?s responsibility to make sure that the domain does not infringe or violate someone else?s rights. According to the Policy, by applying to register or renew a domain name, you are saying that (a) the statements that you made in your Registration Agreement are complete and accurate; (b) to your knowledge, the registration of the domain name will not infringe upon or otherwise violate the rights of any third party; (c) you are not registering the domain name for an unlawful purpose; and (d) you will not knowingly use the domain name in violation of any applicable laws or regulations. Of course, you aren?t expected to look up trademark registrations around the world or research legal issues like common law trademark rights. That?s why the Policy requires the trademark owner (the complainant) to prove bad faith and why the Policy offers domain name holders the opportunity to demonstrate that they have rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. As mentioned above, the Policy was primarily intended to deter abusive domain name registration practices, not punish ordinary domain name holders who register a family name for the purpose of putting family news and pictures online or to prevent people with a legitimate business from registering a name they are commonly known by and then offering bona fide goods and services online. [back to notice text] Question: Is it possible to hold a domain name in good faith even if it is identical or confusingly similar to another's trademark? Answer: The ACPA is forgiving of legitimate uses of domain names. There is less likely to be a violation of the Act if the domain name holder actually has some intellectual property rights in the name, or if the person has previously used the domain name in connection with bona fide offering of goods or services. Operating a domain name to which you have fairly entrenched trademark rights, or having operated a sales website under the domain name for a long time, is somewhat safer. Take note, however, that this safety is illusory if your domain name resembles (or is) a famous mark. Thus an Internet service provider, Virtual Works, lost a case to Volkswagen, over its domain name www.vw.net, because the "VW" mark is famous, even though VW is the abbreviation of Virtual Works, and even though they had operated the site for several years. If your domain name is your own name, or a name by which you are often referred, this is more likely to be deemed a good faith use. Edwin Von Aschenbach will probably be safe in registering www.vonaschenbach.com, even if Von Aschenbach, Co., manufactures high quality desks and "Von Aschenbach" is a trademark in the sale of desks. Edwin Pepsy should be more careful. [back to notice text] Question: What is a trade name? Answer: Answer: A trade name is the actual name of the company. It may or may not also be a trademark. Trademarks are used to label specific goods or services; trade names identify the organization itself. For example, "Ford Motor Company" is a trade name as well as a trademark. "Bronco" is a trademark only. In those cases, if the trade name is registered as a domain name, the name owner is protected against cyber-squatting under traditional trademark provisions and also under the newer Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) and the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) of ICANN. If a trade name is not used as a trademark, it may still be protected under other kinds of laws (having different criteria and remedies), such as unfair competition. However, if the trade name is registered as domain name, the owner will not be protected against cyber-squatting under the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) or the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) of ICANN since they both apply only to trademarks. [back to notice text] Question: What implication does alleged confusion have on claims of trademark infringement? Answer: A mark that is confusingly similar so closely resembles a registered trademark that it is likely to confuse consumers as to the source of the product or service. Consumers could be likely to believe that the product with the confusingly similar mark is produced by the organization that holds the registered mark. Someone who holds a confusingly similar mark benefits from the good will associated with the registered mark and can lure customers to his/her product or service instead. Infringement is determined by whether your mark is confusingly similar to a registered mark. The factors that determine infringement include: proof of actual confusion strength of the established mark proximity of the goods in the marketplace similarity of the marks? sound appearance and meaning how the goods are marketed type of product and how discerning the customer is intent behind selecting the mark likelihood of expansion in the market of the goods [back to notice text] Question: What are the limits on dilution? Answer: The Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 (FTDA, 15 U.S.C. 1125) prohibits the commercial use of a famous mark if such use causes dilution of the distinctive quality of the mark. A mark may be diluted either by "tarnishment" or "blurring." Tarnishment occurs when someone uses a mark on inferior or unwholesome goods or services. For example a court found that a sexually explicit web site using the domain name "candyland.com" diluted by tarnishment the famous trademark "CANDY LAND" owned by Hasbro, Inc. for its board games. Blurring occurs when a famous mark or a mark similar to it is used without permission on other goods and services. The unique and distinctive character of the famous mark to identify one source is weakened by the additional use even though it may not cause confusion to the consumer. The following uses of a famous mark are specifically permitted under the Act: 1) Fair use in comparative advertising to identify the goods or services of the owner of the mark. 2) Noncommercial uses of a mark. 3) All forms of news reporting and news commentary. In addition, the courts have differed as to what constitutes a "famous" mark under the FTDA. In some cases the courts have said that the famousness requirement limits the Act to a very small number of very widely known marks. Other courts, however, have accepted lesser-known marks as PANAVISION, WAWA and EBONY as being famous and yet others have said that merely being famous in one's product line is sufficient. Many states also have antidilution laws protecting mark owners. [back to notice text] Question: What defenses are there to trademark infringement or dilution? Answer: Defendants in a trademark infringement or dilution claim can assert basically two types of affirmative defense: fair use or parody. Fair use occurs when a descriptive mark is used in good faith for its primary, rather than secondary (trademark), meaning, and no consumer confusion is likely to result. So, for example, a cereal manufacturer may be able to describe its cereal as consisting of "all bran," without infringing upon Kelloggs' rights in the mark "All Bran." Such a use is purely descriptive, and does not invoke the secondary meaning of the mark. Similarly, in one case, a court held that the defendant's use of "fish fry" to describe a batter coating for fish was fair use and did not infringe upon the plaintiff's mark "Fish-Fri." Zatarain's, Inc. v. Oak Grove Smokehouse, Inc., 698 F.2d 786 (5th Cir. 1983). Such uses are privileged because they use the terms only in their purely descriptive sense. Some courts have recognized a somewhat different, but closely-related, fair-use defense, called nominative use. Nominative use occurs when use of a term is necessary for purposes of identifying another producer's product, not the user's own product. For example, in a recent case, the newspaper USA Today ran a telephone poll, asking its readers to vote for their favorite member of the music group New Kids on the Block. The New Kids on the Block sued USA Today for trademark infringement. The court held that the use of the trademark "New Kids on the Block" was a privileged nominative use because: (1) the group was not readily identifiable without using the mark; (2) USA Today used only so much of the mark as reasonably necessary to identify it; and (3) there was no suggestion of endorsement or sponsorship by the group. The basic idea is that use of a trademark is sometimes necessary to identify and talk about another party's products and services. When the above conditions are met, such a use will be privileged. New Kids on the Block v. News America Publishing, Inc., 971 F.2d 302 (9th Cir. 1992). Finally, certain parodies of or using trademarks may be permissible if they are not too directly tied to commercial use. The basic idea here is that artistic and editorial parodies of trademarks serve a valuable critical function, and that this critical function is entitled to some degree of First Amendment protection. The courts have adopted different ways of incorporating such First Amendment interests into the analysis. For example, some courts have applied the general "likelihood of confusion" analysis, using the First Amendment as a factor in the analysis. Other courts have expressly balanced First Amendment considerations against the degree of likely confusion. Still other courts have held that the First Amendment effectively trumps trademark law, under certain circumstances. In general, however, the courts appear to be more sympathetic to the extent that parodies are less commercial, and less sympathetic to the extent that parodies involve commercial use of the mark. So, for example, a risqu? parody of an L.L. Bean magazine advertisement (L.L. Beam's "Back to School Sex Catalog") was found not to constitute infringement. L.L. Bean, Inc. v. Drake Publishers, Inc., 811 F.2d 26, 28 (1st Cir. 1987). Similarly, the use of a pig-like character named "Spa'am" in a Muppet movie was found not to violate Hormel's rights in the trademark "Spam." Hormel Foods Corp. v. Jim Henson Prods., 73 F.3d 497 (2d Cir. 1996). On the other hand, "Gucchie Goo" diaper bags were found not to be protected under the parody defense, Gucci Shops, Inc. v. R.H. Macy & Co., 446 F. Supp. 838 (S.D.N.Y. 1977). Similarly, posters bearing the logo "Enjoy Cocaine" were found to violate the rights of Coca-Cola in the slogan "Enjoy Coca-Cola", Coca-Cola Co. v. Gemini Rising, Inc., 346 F. Supp. 1183 (E.D.N.Y. 1972). In short -- although the courts recognize a parody defense, the precise contours of that defense are difficult to outline with any precision. [back to notice text] Question: What is Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act? Answer: The Lanham Act is the basic federal trademark and unfair competition law. Section 43(a) (15 U.S.C. 1125(a)) is intended to protect consumers and competitors against false advertising and false designations of origin. The law allows for suit against someone who makes false claims about its own or a competitor's products. "? 1125. False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden (a) Civil action (1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which-- (A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or (B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person's goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act. [back to notice text] Question: What if I think that my domain name is OK? Am I still in trouble? Answer: The ACPA provides that there is no bad faith if the domain name holder believes, and had reasonable grounds to believe, that his or her use of the domain name was a fair use or otherwise lawful. It is not so clear that this provision will really keep you out of trouble. However, in doubtful cases, if you are using a domain name in which you have some intellectual property rights, and under which you have sold goods or services, and if someone else claims infringement upon a slightly-but-not-very famous mark, it might be of some use as an additional factor in your favor. [back to notice text] Question: What does "traffics in" mean? Answer: According to the ACPA, it refers to "transactions that include, but are not limited to, sales, purchases, loans, pledges, licenses, exchanges of currency," and any other transfer for payment. In other words, any transaction involving the domain name that generates value for the cybersquatter.

Topic maintained by Berkman Center for Internet & Society