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
Berkman Center for Internet & Society
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > UDRP > Notices > Battle for the Planet Printer-friendly version

Battle for the Planet

December 9, 2005

 

Sender Information:
IGN Entertainment
Sent by: [Private]
Fenwick & West
San Francisco, CA, 94111, USA

Recipient Information:
[Private]
Planet Combat LLC
Daphne, AL, 36526, USA


Sent via: Email
Re: PLANET COMBAT Trademark, Planet Combat LLC Trade

Dear Mssrs. [private]:

This firm represents IGN Entertainment, Inc. ("IGN Entertainment") in intellectual property and other matters. IGN Entertainment (www.ign.com) owns and operates the Internet's largest network of destinations for video gaming, entertainment and communities targeted to teens and young adults ages 18-34. The company's properties include the popular IGN.com, GameSpy, and PLANET family of trademarks, including FILEPLANET, RPG PLANET, SPORT PLANET, STRATEGY PLANET and 3DACTION PLANET, which links to the Planet Battlefield site (www.planetbattlefield.com), which features the popular BATTLEFIELD 2 action game. IGN Entertainment is also a leading provider of technology for online game play in video games and provides more than 70 community sites and a vast array of online forums.

It has recently come to IGN Entertainment's attention that your company has filed in the United States an application to register PLANET COMBAT for "entertainment services, namely, providing an on-line computer game" (Exhibit A) and is using the PLANET COMBAT service mark, Planet Combat LLC trade name and planetcombat.net domain name in connection with computer game web sites, including a site featuring the Battlefield 2 action game. We understand that Planet Combat LLC only recently commenced use of the PLANET COMBAT trademark in December 2004.

Given your use of a mark, trade name and domain name so similar to IGN Entertainment's PLANET family of marks, for computer gaming websites and services, it seems quite likely that you are aware of IGN Entertainment's PLANET family of sites and services. You may not be aware, however, that IGN Entertainment has used the PLANET family of marks and fileplanet.com domain name, since 1997 in connection with a wide variety of services directed to young adults, including computer gaming news, information, and reviews, and related products and services. IGN Entertainment has expended a great deal of time and financial resources to build up customer recognition and goodwill related to its PLANET family of marks in the U.S. and internationally.

In addition, IGN Entertainment is the owner of trademark registrations in the United States for the FILEPLANET mark (see enclosed documents relating to U.S. Registration No. 2,455,345 for the FILEPLANET word mark and U.S. Registration No. 2,461,694 for the FILEPLANET and Design mark each for "entertainment services in the nature of maintaining a network of sites on a global computer network for computer games manufactured by others." (Exhibit B) These registrations attest to the strength of IGN Entertainment's rights in these marks and provide IGN Entertainment with exclusive rights in the marks for the services identified in the registrations. In light of the importance of the PLANET family of marks and the strength of IGN Entertainment's legal rights to its valuable intellectual property, IGN Entertainment is determined to take whatever steps are necessary to protect its rights in the PLANET mark.

Consequently, we are writing to inform you that your use of the PLANET COMBAT mark and trade name and www.planetcombat.net domain name may cause confusion of consumers in the marketplace, and thereby violate IGN Entertainment's established trademark rights. In light of the fact that your PLANET COMBAT mark is so similar to IGN Entertainment's PLANET family of marks, and your company operates in the same field of business as IGN Entertainment, your use of the PLANET COMBAT mark and www.planetcombat.net domain will inevitably tend to lead consumers to mistakenly believe that your services are IGN Entertainment's, or that your company and its services are somehow affiliated with IGN Entertainment, or are endorsed, sponsored, or approved by IGN Entertainment. The risk of such confusion is greatly exacerbated by the fact that your company offers identical services targeted to identical populations, in particular with respect to your site featuring the BATTLEFIELD 2 game, which IGN Entertainment also features under its PLANET marks. (See www.planetbattlefield.com.) Such likelihood of confusion constitutes an infringement of IGN Entertainment's rights in its valuable PLANET family of marks. As such, please be advised that should you continue your use the PLANET COMBAT trade name and mark, your actions may entitle our client to injunctive relief and triple monetary damages, as well as payment of IGN Entertainment's attorneys' fees and costs in being forced to bring a willful infringement action to protect its exclusive rights.

Your risk of exposure to treble monetary damages and to payment of IGN Entertainment's attorneys' fees and costs is very real in light of IGN Entertainment's worldwide reputation in its PLANET family of marks among computer gaming consumers, your knowledge of this reputation and, despite this knowledge, your choice of a mark and name consisting of our client's PLANET mark followed by the term COMBAT, calculated to create an association with IGN Entertainment's reputation in its PLANET family of marks and your use of such a mark for directly competitive services.

Furthermore, because the PLANET family of marks is famous among computer gaming consumers, your use of PLANET COMBAT under these circumstances also violates U.S. Anti-Dilution laws by lessening the source-identifying power of the PLANET family of marks. Under U.S. Anti Dilution laws your use would be found to harm IGN Entertainment without proof that consumers are likely to be confused.

Similarly, we note that your registration of the www.planetcombat.net domain name could represent a violation of IGN Entertainment's rights under the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act ("ACPA"). A domain name registrant is liable under the ACPA if he or she obtains a domain name in bad faith that is confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark. As discussed above, the www.planetcombat.net domain name you registered is confusingly similar to our client's PLANET family of marks, and we believe your registration and use of the domain might well be deemed bad faith within the legal meaning of ACPA, in light of your knowledge of IGN Entertainment's PLANET marks and your registration and use of a domain name calculated to be associated with IGN Entertainment's PLANET family of marks for use for directly competitive services. Under the Act, IGN Entertainment is entitled to take legal action to require the transfer of the domain name to our client. In addition, under the ACPA, you could be liable for statutory damages of up to $100,000.

In addition, your company's registration of the www.planetcombat.net domain name also violates its representations in the registration agreement with Tucows, Inc., the registrar with whom you registered this domain. In your registration agreement, you agreed to submit to proceedings under the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers' ("ICANN") approved Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy ("UDRP"). Under the UDRP, a domain name registrant is accountable if he or she obtained a domain name in bad faith that is identical or confusingly similar to another's trademark or service mark, and in which he or she has no legitimate interest. As noted above, the www.planetcombat.net domain name is confusingly similar to our client's PLANET family of marks and www.fileplanet.com and www.planetbattlefield.com domain names, and we believe that your registration and use of the domain might well constitute bad faith under the terms set forth in the UDRP.

Accordingly, demand is hereby made that you cease your use of PLANET COMBAT as a trade name and mark, and agree to transfer the www.planetcombat.net domain name to IGN Entertainment within 10 days. Please respond in writing no later than December 19, 2005, confirming your intent to comply and to arrange transfer of the domain name to IGN Entertainment. Should you refuse to discontinue your use of the PLANET COMBAT mark and domain, we have instructions to take such steps as are appropriate to protect IGN Entertainment's rights.

Be advised that IGN Entertainment reserves the right to take whatever actions it deems necessary, before or after the date set forth above, without further notice to you, to protect its valuable trademark rights and to avoid any further consumer confusion.

We look forward to your prompt response and cooperation.

Sincerely,
FENWICK & WEST LLP
[private]

cc: IGN Entertainment, Inc.
TUCOWS, Inc.

Enclosures

 
FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]


Question: What is "intellectual property"?

Answer: Intellectual property refers to the rights one has in the product of one's intellect. This includes copyright (rights in creative expression)and patents (rights in inventions, discoveries, methods, compositions of matter, etc.) which are granted by article I, section 8 clause 8 of the US Constitution which gives Congress the power to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

Related rights include trademark (rights in the names one uses to identify one's goods and services), trade secret (confidential business practices), unfair trade practice, passing off, trade libel, false advertising, misappropriation. Laws protecting most of these rights exist at both the state and federal level. "Proprietary rights" is just a general term meaning "one's own rights."


[back to notice text]


Question: What about common words that are used for many purposes?

Answer: Common words and alphabetical letters can be protectable trademarks if they are used in arbitrary or unusual ways. One cannot trademark DIESEL to sell that generic type of fuel, otherwise no other diesel fuel dealer could use the word to identify the product. However, one could trademark DIESEL as a brand of ice cream. The owner of the ice cream mark can't use its rights to prevent fuel dealers from using the word on their station pumps nor can it prevent anyone else from using the word for non-trademark purposes, such as a website listing diesel fuel dealers.

In general, the more a mark describes the good or service that it labels, the less strong the trademark protection it gets and the more freedom others have to use the same word for other purposes.

See also this question on the strength of trademarks.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is a trademark and why does it get special protection?

Answer: A trademark includes any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination, used, or intended to be used, in commerce to identify and distinguish the goods of one manufacturer or seller from goods manufactured or sold by others, and to indicate the source of the goods. In short, a trademark is a brand name.

Consumers reap the benefit when trademarks are protected. By preventing anyone but the actual mark owner from labeling goods with the mark, it helps prevent consumers getting cheated by shoddy knock-off imitators. It encourages mark owners to maintain quality goods so that customers will reward them by looking for their label as an indication of excellence. Consumers as well as mark owners benefit from trademark laws.

Trademark owners spend a lot of time, money, and effort to protect the distinctiveness of their trademark. Once trademarks have become diluted to the point where the general public no longer recognizes them as distinctly applying to a particular manufacturer, they lose their value to the trademark owner because they no longer attract customers to his particular goods. For example, ?aspirin? used to be the trademark of one particular manufacturer of synthesized acetylsalicylic acid, but is now used to generically describe that product regardless of who produces it. Trademarks owners must be vigilant to make sure that their trademarks rights are not being infringed and that their trademarks are not becoming diluted or generic.

The birth of the Internet and the use of character strings (domain names) to represent Internet addresses has presented trademark owners with a whole new set of problems. It is often too expensive to register every variation of a trademark in every top level domain. Therefore, trademark owners must make sure that the people who register domain names that are either the same as or confusingly similar to a trademark are not using the domain name in a way that infringes on the trademark. One way to ensure that the trademark owner will not lose its rights in the mark is to file a UDRP complaint so that the Panel can decide whether the domain was registered in order to take unfair advantage of the mark owner. The Panel may decide that the trademark owner was wrong and had nothing to worry about, but unless the trademark owner is vigilant and files the complaint, it may never know for sure whether its rights were being abused.


[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 is the bare minimum of trademark law that I have to understand to decipher this C&D?

Answer: Your opponent should say that your mark is causing consumer confusion or is likely to cause consumer confusion. Or it should mention it's famousness and complain of dilution or tarnishment. (If the C&D does not say this, then no trademark claim may actually exist, and you can rest assured that your opponent is engaging in scare tactics or has hired a highly incompetent attorney). A mark protects more than identical copying, it extends to anything that is confusingly similar, even if it isn't exactly the same.

Functioning in a quasi-magical talisman-like capacity, trademarks designate the source or quality of goods or services. For this reason, the law protects against confusion in the market place by ensuring that marks on the same or similar products or services are sufficiently different. The law also protects famous marks against dilution of value and tarnishment of the reputation of the goods or services on which it appears or the source of those products, regardless of any confusion.

You can roughly assess the validity of your opponent?s claim of confusion by classifying the marks involved. A trademark can fall into one of 5 categories. It can be: (1) fanciful; (2) arbitrary; (3) suggestive; (4) descriptive; or (5) generic. Not all of these varieties of marks are entitled to the same level, or indeed any level, of trademark protection.

A fanciful mark is a mark someone made up; examples include KODAK or H?AGEN-DAZS. An arbitrary mark is a known term applied to a completely unrelated product or service; for instance, AMAZON.com for an online book-store cum one-stop shopping site or APPLE for computers. Fanciful and arbitrary marks are considered strong marks and garner substantial trademark protection.

A suggestive mark is one that hints at the product, but which requires an act of imagination to make the connection: COPPERTONE for sun tan lotion or PENGUIN for coolers or refrigerators are examples. Suggestive marks are also strong marks and receive protection.

A descriptive mark, predictably, describes the product: HOLIDAY INN describes a vacation hotel and FISH-FRI describes batter for frying fish. Descriptive marks do not receive any trademark protection unless their user has used them in commerce and has built up secondary meaning. "Secondary meaning" occurs when consumers identify the goods or services on which the descriptive term appears with a single source. In other words, if consumers know that HOLIDAY INN hotels are all affiliated with a single source, then the mark has secondary meaning and receives trademark protection.

Finally, generic marks simply designate the variety of goods involved: for example, "cola" used on soft drinks and "perfume" on perfume are both generic terms. Generic marks never receive any trademark protection; they are free for everybody to use. (Keep in mind, though, that "Cola" on a nightclub is arbitrary, and therefore receives protection).

If your opponent is complaining that you have used the word "bakery" for a bake shop or "car" for a car repair shop, then you can safely guess that the c & d is baseless. On the other hand, if your opponent is concerned about the fact that both of you use of the term "Sweet Pickles" on alpaca sweaters, then the c & d may have some merit.

There are a few more wrinkles as well. Some marks are word marks (text only) and others are design marks (images which may or may not include text). Design marks do not provide independent protectin for the text incorporated in the design. So if the mark is only a design mark, it doesn't prevent others from using the text so long as they don't copy the design elements.


[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 can I find out if someone has a valid trademark?

Answer: It isn't easy. In the United States, a trademark owner isn't required to register the mark anywhere, so there is no single central list of them all. Unlike most other nations, registration here is optional.

Many owners do register their marks with the government, however, to better notify the world of their claims. Each state has its own trademark registry for goods and services sold locally. For companies that sell in more than one state, there is a US federal registry that is accessible online through TESS. TESS is searchable by key word as well as by registration number.

Because registration is not required, however, a word might still be a protected mark even if it doesn't appear in any of these locations.

When a company is selecting a new brand, its trademark attorney will usually conduct a "trademark availability" search which will look in many different locations to try and ferret out competing uses of the desired name. Business directories, Internet search engines, telephone directories are other searched sources. Multi-national vendors will search trademark registries in foreign nations as well.

Even the most exhaustive search will not be conclusive, however, but it will usually indicate that if there is any other commercial use, it is probably limited to a very local area. It is OK to use the same mark as another company, so long as the new use isn't likely to confuse consumers.


[back to notice text]


Question: Where can I find federal trademark registrations?

Answer: The United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) keeps the US federal registry of trademarks. It has an online search capability, TESS, which contains more than 3 million pending, registered and dead federal trademarks. This database may not be complete. One should check the News page to see how current the information actually is.

Be aware: not all trademarks are contained in the US federal register. There are state trademarks, unregistered (common law marks) and foreign marks as well. A mark does not have to be registered to be valid.


[back to notice text]


Question: What exactly are the rights a trademark owner has?

Answer: In the US, trademark rights come from actual use of the mark to label one's services or products or they come from filing an application with the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) that states an intention to use the mark in future commerce. In most foreign countries, trademarks are valid only upon registration.

There are two trademark rights: the right to use (or authorize use) and the right to register.

The person who establishes priority rights in a mark gains the exclusive right to use it to label or identify their goods or services, and to authorize others to do so. According to the Lanham Act, determining who has priority rights in a mark involves establishing who was the first to use it to identify his/her goods.

The PTO determines who has the right to register the mark. Someone who registers a trademark with the intent to use it gains "constructive use" when he/she begins using it, which entitles him/her to nationwide priority in the mark. However, if two users claim ownership of the same mark (or similar marks) at the same time, and neither has registered it, a court must decide who has the right to the mark. The court can issue an injunction (a ruling that requires other people to stop using the mark) or award damages if people other than the owner use the trademark (infringement).

Trademark owners do not acquire the exclusive ownership of words. They only obtain the right to use the mark in commerce and to prevent competitors in the same line of goods or services from using a confusingly similar mark. The same word can therefore be trademarked by different producers to label different kinds of goods. Examples are Delta Airlines and Delta Faucets.

Owners of famous marks have broader rights to use their marks than do owners of less-well-known marks. They can prevent uses of their marks by others on goods that do not even compete with the famous product.


[back to notice text]


Question: What does it mean to take all reasonable steps to protect a trademark?

Answer: If a trademark owner fails to police his or her mark, the owner may be deemed to have abandoned the mark or acquiesced in its misuse. A trademark is only protected while it serves to identify the source of goods or services.

If a trademark owner believes someone is infringing his or her trademark, the first thing the owner is likely to do is to write a "cease-and-desist" letter which asks the accused infringer to stop using the trademark. If the accused infringer refuses to comply, the owner may file a lawsuit in Federal or state court. The court may grant the plaintiff a preliminary injunction on use of the mark -- tell the infringer to stop using the trademark pending trial.

If the owner successfully proves trademark infringement in court, the court has the power to: order a permanent injunction; order monetary payment for profit the plaintiff can prove it would have made but for defendant's use of the mark; possibly increase this payment; possibly award a monetary payment of profits the defendant made while using the mark; and possibly order the defendant to pay the plaintiff's attorney fees in egregious cases of infringement.

Of course, the determination of infringement is actually one that will be made by the court, so a trademark owner is simply using a best guess about whether or not infringement actually has occurred. That best guess may be a good one, based on experience and expertise, or it may be a bad one that doesn't reflect any of the legitimate defenses that might exist. The law doesn't require the mark owner to sue everyone; it just requires the owner to keep his mark distinctive.


[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 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 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 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: Where can I find federal trademark law?

Answer: To be protected by federal trademark law, the marked goods and services must be used in interstate commerce. Federal trademark law is known as the Lanham Act. It protects marks that are registered with the United States Patent & Trademark Office as well as those that are in use but never registered.

Court opinions and United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) regulations also interpret trademark rights and remedies. See the links to court sites provided by the Legal Information Insitute.


[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 constitutes "bad faith" use of a domain name?

Answer: The ACPA instructs the courts to consider a number of factors to determine the presence of bad faith. These are enumerated in the paragraphs below, but many involve new concepts that are rather vaguely defined. It may take some time before courts decide exactly how these new terms should be interpreted.


  1. A court is likely to decide that a domain name registrant acquired or used the name in bad faith if s/he sought to divert customers from a trademark owner's website to another that, either for purposes of commercial gain or to tarnish the mark, could harm the goodwill represented by the mark. "Goodwill" is a legal term indicating the valuable relationship or familiarity that exists between businesses and their customers and is often embodied in their trademark symbols. It can be harmed if the domain name is likely to cause confusion about what organization created or sponsored a website. Bad faith from attempted commercial gain can arise if a domain name holder steals customers because the name is so similar to a trademark. For example, a shoe retailer might hold www.reabok.com, hoping to steal shoe buyers from customers looking for Reebok shoes. Bad faith from tarnishing can arise if a domain name similar to a trademark leads web surfers to a site, such as a pornographic website, that tends to harm the "good name" of the trademark owner. Or a pornographic website at www.reabok.com could create an unwholesome association that Reebok would like to avoid. (Although, Reebok may be considered a famous mark?see below for more).

  2. A court will almost certainly find bad faith if the domain name holder attempts to sell the domain name for financial gain to either the trademark owner or someone else, without having used it or without intending to use it.

  3. A court is likely to find bad faith if the name holder provides false or misleading identification information when applying for registration, or if the holder fails to accurately update this information. A court will also frown upon a prior history of such behavior.

  4. A court is likely to find bad faith if the person registers a number of names identical or similar to trademarks.


[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 "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 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.


Topic maintained by Berkman Center for Internet & Society

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