Legal News

Circuit City Trademark & Domain Sale Approved

According to an article published in this morning’s Boston Globe, Systemax will purchase Circuit City, its trademarks and domain names for $14 million, in a deal approved by the court overseeing the Circuit City bankruptcy. I presume this means that Systemax, a computer and electronics sales company, will begin to operate and re-open the Circuit City website.

Last year, this same company purchased the rights to CompUSA’s trademarks, some stores, and its domain names. Presently, CompUSA has a large web presence, including some consumer electronics not associated with computers (televisions, GPS…etc).

FMA to Launch Vanity Email Service

In the UDRP decision for the domain name Miki.com, (which was defended by Kenyon & Kenyon and won by Future Media Architects), the company announced its plans to launch a vanity email service on some of its domain names. People will be able to choose email addresses from the portfolio of high value domain names owned by FMA, including Cool.com, Party.com, Falcons.com, Monsters.com, Jackass.com, and many other generic domain names in its portfolio.

Tucows’ NetIdentity portfolio of common surnames offers something similar, but FMA has a portfolio of hundreds of fun domain names that will surely be in high demand. The company is still working out the interface, but according to Thunayan Khalid Al-Ghanim, President of FMA, the company hopes to begin offering the service sometime in the near future.

This is another corporate attempt at wrestling a generic domain name from a legitimate domain owner. How many more victories will Thunayan and FMA need to have before outsiders see this as a losing cause?

NBA Player Gets Domain & Cash Judgment

According to a news release today, prestigious law firm Winston & Strawn prevailed in a lawsuit on behalf of NBA basketball player Chris Bosh, who not only won the domain name ChrisBosh.com, but he also won a financial judgment of $120,000 (including legal fees and damages). The $120,000 judgment does not include the attorney’s fees that the domain owner needed to pay for his own representation, of course.

The court ruled that the plaintiff had used Bosh’s name to generate revenues for the domain owner, without the player’s consent or approval. The release also noted that the defendant also owns something like 800 other domain names of athletes and other famous professionals, some of whom may see this judgment and look to file suit to claim their domain name back as well as any potential damages.

This should serve as a warning to people who register the domain names of famous athletes, politicians, and celebrities. There certainly are legitimate uses for these types of domain names, but there are also ways that owners can put these domain names at risk, and also put their business at risk. When you buy or own a domain name like this, you should consider the risk vs. reward of ownership, and see this case as an example of a major risk.

I frequently see people discussing this issue in domain forums, and now you have an answer.

WIPO Wants Registrars Held Responsible

I was reading Mike’s Blog today about WIPO wanting domain registrars to be held responsible for their registrants’ trademark infringing domain names, and I give it a thumbs up.   In fact, I said the same thing back in March of 2008, “Registrars Should Help Prevent Cybersquatting.”

I believe that many people register domain names that have trademarks in them without really knowing the risks involved. When I first started buying domain names circa 2003-04, there were a few trademark names that I purchased.   I didn’t know the legalities of this, and when I found out, I canceled the few that I owned and bought back a few that I had sold, and cancelled them, too.   Although the likelihood of getting sued for names I created out of thin air was small, I didn’t want to deal with them.

I do understand why some companies invest in trademark domain names that receive traffic and generate revenue. It’s a business decision that some companies have to make, but in most cases, new registrations are way more of a liability than a profitable business.   I cringe when I see names for sale on Ebay like MicrosoftProductDownloads.com (or something similar), because they are screaming at Microsoft to file a lawsuit (this one happens to be unregistered). I attribute some of these new registrations and sale attempts to people who aren’t aware of the legal ramifications and liabilty a name like this can have.

I think the domain registrars should be a bit more responsible when it comes to names that are obvious trademarks.   Sure, there is a considerable gray area, but if they were required to warn registrants about potentially infringing domain names (like the Surgeon General warns smokers), there would be a lot less cybersquatting – and consequently less revenue for the registrars.

Upon further review, back in July of 2007, when I first started blogging, I said the following, and I still agree with it today (aside from the term “crime” as it’s not technically criminal).

In my opinion, a majority of trademark inclusive domain names aren’t owned by malicious people, but rather those who don’t know it is against the law. As a measure against unlawfully registering a domain name with a trademark, what if registrars required consumers to check off a box acknowledging that they are aware of the Lanham Act and its penalties before every registration? Perhaps even a brief summary of the law along with the possible penalties of owning/selling/profiting from a trademarked name would act as a deterrent to people who may be unknowingly committing a crime.

I believe the sooner we police our industry, the better things will be for us all.

ICANN Issues to Be Concerned About

2

Mike Berkens has written three interesting posts that are important for all domain owners to read and understand. When you have an opportunity today, please read Mike’s posts and the accompanying commentary. The issues that are discussed could potentially impact all domain owners

ICANN Releases New gTLD Guide Book: Still Includes No Price Caps: Your Domains Are At Risk

ICA: Trademark Holders Attempting To Greatly Expand Their Rights Through The New gTLD Process

Thinking About Applying For Your Own gTLD? It Could Cost You A Lot More Than $185K

The Internet Commerce Association is working on some of the issues, but I know they need our support (if you own a domain name, you are part of the collective “our”).   As soon as my tax bills are taken care of in a month and a half, I will be making my annual contribution.

Top Search Result for “Jackass:” Viacom

2

Late last year, Viacom, the parent company of MTV, filed a UDRP for the domain name Jackass.com, one of thousands of generic domain names owned by Future Media Architects. Since FMA doesn’t sell their domain assets, the UDRP would seem to be the only “cost effective” way to acquire the domain name. In a fairly lengthy decision dated January 30, 2009, the single panelist ruled in favor of Future Media Architects.

One of the most convincing factors that led to FMA’s prevailing in this decision was that they held a US trademark for “JACKASS” in relation to computer services.   The trademark was registered by the USPTO in September 2005 after a full standard review of the trademark application.   Although FMA planned to use Jackass.com for adult services, they changed their business model in favor of a search engine.

According to the sole panelist in this decision, the trademark tipped the scales in FMA’s favor:

“Thus, here the evidence suggests that the domain name was acquired by the Respondent because of its descriptive value, but has been used on a pay-per-click website in a way that is not clearly related to that descriptive value but also not clearly related to the Complainant’s trademark. In some circumstances, these facts may not be sufficient for the Respondent to show that use of the disputed domain name is bona fide. Here, the Respondent has an additional factor in its favour a United States trademark registration covering search engines. In these particular circumstances, the Respondent could be said to be providing, or at least to have taken some demonstrable steps towards providing, a search engine under the Jackass brand. That, in this Panel’s view, is enough to tip the finely balanced scales in the Respondent’s favour on the provided record in this particular case.”

It’s unfortunate that FMA needed to hold a trademark in order to keep their generic domain name, but a win is a win.   If Thunayan Khalid AL-Ghanim chooses to forego the search engine route and needs some material for his site, I know where he can find it.

Recent Posts

FedEx Buys Its 3 Letter .com Ticker Symbol

0
It looks like FedEx has acquired a valuable 3 letter .com domain name. Whois records show FedEx is now the owner of FDX.com. The...

Squadhelp Rebrands as Atom with Atom.com

7
Squadhelp announced a complete rebrand this morning. The company is now known as Atom, and it acquired the Atom.com domain name in advance of...

Nissan Going after Nissan.ai

3
Nissan is an automaker that uses NissanUSA.com for its website here in the US. The reason it uses an off-brand domain name is because...

Using AI For Background Image

9
I acquired a domain name last week, and once it transferred to GoDaddy, I set up a custom landing page using Carrd. Instead of...

It’s All About the Time You Put into It

2
A few years ago, my wife jokingly described my daily work lifestyle as leisurely. In some ways, I thought of that as a badge...