Top Menu

Archive | October, 2010

Initial Interest Confusion, Basis for Abusive Registration

Panels use the phrase “initial interest confusion” in two contexts: “[1] confusion of authorship upon reading the content of a website and [2] confusion of an Internet user who is seeking the mark owner’s website but is attracted to the alternative website by its similarity (in this case, identity) with a recognized mark,” Justice for […]

Continue Reading 0

Contract Provisions: The Out of Print and Reversion of Rights Clause

Gerald M. Levine, Co-Author Most publishing contracts provide for both the establishment and termination of the author/publisher relationship.  Why should an author be concerned about the “out of print” clause?  The Grant of Rights in the contract is likely to be “for the full term of copyright plus renewals and extensions.”  The current term of […]

Continue Reading 0

Legitimately Offering a Domain Name for Sale by a Transferee from a Related Transferor

A respondent is ordinarily responsible for its behavior immediately upon registration and chargeable for its use of the domain name thereafter. I previously noted October 25 that transferee respondents from related parties are treated differently from respondents acquiring their domain names upon non-renewal from prior holders. La Société des Bains de Mer et du Cercle […]

Continue Reading 0

Unfair Use of an Association’s Trademark

A respondent may, as has frequently been pointed out, rightfully register a domain name incorporating a complainant’s trademark if authorized by contract or permitted under a nominative fair use theory. If neither, the registration is abusive. In National Association of Realtors v. John Fothergill, D2010-1284 (WIPO September 20, 2010) the Panel held that the domain […]

Continue Reading 0

Acquiring Domains After Non-Renewal by Prior Registrant

Transferees who acquire domain names from related entities or by purchase and registrants who independently acquire their domain names after non-renewal by prior registrants are treated differently. The former inherit bad faith use (the alleged good faith transfer is implicitly tainted); the latter, untainted by any prior bad faith use, start anew.  Just how heavy […]

Continue Reading 0

Proving Trademark Acquisition

“Pay-per-click websites” (noted the Panel in Business Filings Incorporated v. John Thalacker D/B/A Traffico, D2010-1332 (WIPO October 1, 2010)) “are often found not to be bona fide offerings of goods or services, but this is not always the case.” It continued that the “issue turns primarily on the content of Respondent’s website at a particular […]

Continue Reading 0

Misusing Pejorative Plus Trademarks for Commercial Gain or to Denigrate a Competitor

Trademark + pejorative signaling criticism of the goods or services of a trademark holder are a powerful irritant. If the composition complies with the privilege of fair use a pejorative is an affirmative defense. However, the rules are unaccommodating for any infraction. This has been illustrated in a number of UDRP cases unsuccessfully defended. In […]

Continue Reading 0

Acquiring Domain Name through Merger or Acquisition

A transferee is likely to take possession of a disputed domain name under conditions factually different from the original registrant. It inherits its transferor’s bad faith use without any advantage of its good faith (were that the case) registration. This applies equally to transferees unrelated as to those related to the original registrant. Unless the […]

Continue Reading 0

Trademarks Composed of Descriptive Phrases

With qualification, descriptive phrases are not denied trademark registration but they are less protected from concurrent users. That is clear from such trademarks as BABY ESSENTIALS, the subject of A.D. Sutton & Sons, Inc. v. BABYESSENTIALS.COM c/o Nameview Inc. Whois IDentity Shield / Vertical Axis Inc., D2010-1125 (WIPO September 22, 2010). Other examples have been […]

Continue Reading 1

Language of UDRP Proceedings

Rule 11(a) of the Rules of the Policy is a two clause provision. The first clause provides that “[u]nless otherwise agreed by the Parties, or specified otherwise in the Registration Agreement, the language of the administrative proceeding shall be the language of the Registration Agreement.” The second clause dilutes the imperative of the first by […]

Continue Reading 0

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers:

4/xVVyQrMpFFp6VcOTT2qD9g.0oyCn-dWDJ0cJvIeHux6iLYvgUztkQI
%d bloggers like this: