Top Menu

Tag Archives | Confusing similarity

The Respondent Who Specializes in Misspellings

As trademarks composed of dictionary words or descriptive phrases descend the classification scale there is an increasing likelihood of registrants registering and using domain names corresponding to trademarks plausibly lacking knowledge of trademark owners. In the past several months the lower end includes <>, <> (God of Medicine), <>, <>, <>, and <>. Earlier there […]

Continue Reading 0

Trademarks Composed of Dictionary Words

See Anthology of Commentaries — 2014 Trademarks composed of dictionary words are not protected against uses that take advantage of their semantic meanings. Dictionary words are the least protected outside of their particularly associations. On the classification scale, fanciful, arbitrary and suggestive are at the strong end of the scale, while descriptive and generic (if […]

Continue Reading 0

Assessing Closeness of Domain Name to Trademark

The UDRP analysis begins with assessing the closeness of the domain name to the trademark. Identical is letter by letter the same; similar is a string that can be confused with the trademark. A complainant has standing to maintain a proceding only if it can show that the  accused domain name raisees the probability of […]

Continue Reading 0

Multiple Users of Term Other than Trademark Owner

There have been a number of recent UDRP cases in which complainants’ trademarks are composed of letters or words that have currency for other users in the marketplace. Two, three and four letter strings, for example, are valuable names that could also be acronyms. Examples: <> and <>. The Panel in Rocky Mountain Health Maintenance […]

Continue Reading 0

Identity of Terms Within a String Do Not Add Up To Confusing Similarity

Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is not satisfied by simply showing that the trademark and the domain name bear a similarity of parts, unless it suggests the whole. Whether the domain name is “confusingly similar” to the trademark focuses on differences in the composition of the string of letters, words or numbers. Prefixes and suffixes […]

Continue Reading 0

What Standards for Confusing Similarity?

In assessing whether a domain name is confusingly similar to the complainant’s trademark the analytical procedure is to make a side by side comparison of the two. The “www” prefix and the “gTLD” are disregarded as functional elements. The focus is solely on the second level domain (SLD). As a general rule if the SLD […]

Continue Reading 0


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers:

%d bloggers like this: