Legal News

Contributory Trademark Infringement Ruling Could Impact Parking Companies

7

Mike posted an article about a case that I read yesterday regarding Louis Vuitton being awarded $32 million in damages from two hosting companies that were found guilty of Contributory Trademark Infringement. The companies had apparently been informed that there were counterfeit goods being sold on websites it hosted, but it did nothing:

“In awarding the damages, the jury agreed with Paris-based Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A.’s claims that the defendants knowingly allowed several Web sites they hosted to sell products that infringed Louis Vuitton’s copyrights and trademarks.”

When I first read the Computerworld article, my thought was that there are probably some domain parking companies that are nervous about this. At least two large parking companies have their operations in California, and they would presumably be held to the rulings of the U.S. District Court in the state of California. Further, one could believe that any company doing business with California residents could potentially be held liable for Contributory Trademark Infringement if they are doing anything to help monetize a trademark infringing domain name.

A parking company that provides PPC landing pages for hundreds of thousands of domain names could be in a similar position as the hosting companies in this situation. There’s no way to monitor every single potential trademark violation on all of the domain names it helps monetize. It will be even more important for them to look into every trademark infringement email notification they receive.

Monitor Your Brands

I monitor a bunch of keywords and domain names on my Cotweet account, one of the Twitter applications I use on a regular basis. A couple of days ago, I saw that another Twitter user had mentioned one of my domain names with a ccTLD extension, and because her post was in a different language, I didn’t really understand what she was saying at first.

Instead of translating the Tweet, I decided to type in the domain name she mentioned, and I was surprised to see a fully developed cosmetics company operating on the ccTLD. I am not too concerned about them accusing me of using their brand because my domain name is a fully developed business, they are in another company, and I am not even operating in the same industry.

However, I did some additional research to make sure that my usage started before theirs and that they don’t have any trademarks or pending marks for the term in the US.   While this might be unnecessary, I am just doing my due diligence to proactively see what could lie ahead. With the ease of filing a UDRP, I want to make sure I am prepared just in case.

If you own and operate a business on a domain name where other companies are operating on different extensions, you, too should do your due diligence. Ignorance is never a valid defense!

Use Caution With “Generic” Terms

I have found that when a domain investor owns domain names with generic terms, like NewHouses.com for example, they are generally free and clear of trademark issues, aside from when a bullying company wants the domain name and is willing to take legal action to fight for it. However, there are many terms out there that may seem like they’re generic, when in fact they are protected terms that are often vigorously defended by trademark holders.

I am not a lawyer and don’t pretend to be one, so take this with a grain of salt. However, I believe that in order to keep a trademark active, the trademark holder must protect its ownership of the mark, so that others can’t claim it’s free to use by anyone. For example, while Google loves that people are “Googling,” they need to protect that term from becoming public domain and prevent others from using it.

In fact, I read something unrelated to domain names, but backs this claim up. In reference to Bud Light’s proposed “Fan Cans” with college athletic team colors, Vince Sweeney, Vice Chancellor at University of Wisconsin said, “If you don’t protect your trademarks, you eventually lose them, so we felt it was important to at least communicate to them that we didn’t think it was an appropriate tact.

That said, there are terms being used by many people in domain sales threads that are actually protected by the owners of those trademarks. One of the most commonly used terms that I believe people don’t realize is a trademark is “Realtor,” which is a trademark of the National Association of Realtors. This organization protects the term “Realtor,” and has many rules about how the term can be used, especially when it comes to domain names and websites.

Additionally, there are terms are protected in some countries, but generic in other countries and free to use in advertising materials, including domain names.   Some of these terms include Band Aid, Yellow Pages, Kleenex, Yo Yo, Escalator, Aspirin, Thermos, and many others. There are also terms that are free to use for some types of products and services, but others are protected by brand owners who are borderline over-protective.

While some people might think it’s unreasonable to do trademark searches before buying every single domain name, it can save the domain investor from registering infringing domain names – especially when the objective is re-sale rather than development.

Last night, I received a huge list of domain names for sale, with nearly all of them containing the name of a popular brand. The owner claimed that the brand name was his last name, and that the company had never contacted him about the domain names. Perhaps it was okay for him to own the domain name, although some of the names were clearly related to the brand rather than him (they contained the brand name + product type), but they wouldn’t be okay for me to own since I have no relation to the brand name or to the brand.

It costs under $10 to buy a domain name, but if you buy a domain name that infringes upon a company’s trademark, it can cost thousands of dollars to defend, and some companies don’t care as much about the infringing domain name as they care about making an example out of the domain registrant.

AOL Just Protecting Its Brand

Ad.com

Last month at an engagement party, I met a friend of a friend who works for Advertising.com. After brief introductions and small talk, he mentioned that he works for Ad.com. Knowing that Ad.com had just sold at Moniker’s auction for 7 figures, I inquired further, and he mentioned that his company is actually Advertising.com, but everyone calls it Ad.com. Therein lies the problem.

In most cases, when a company or famous person has become known by a nickname, and that nickname or moniker becomes just as famous as the person (and clearly associated with the company or person), that company or person may be able to legally claim common law rights to that nickname or term.

Michael Jordan was known as “Air Jordan” because of his leaping and dunking ability. During his playing days, Nike introduced the Air Jordan brand, and I believe it is still one of their most famous brands. Had Michael Jordan not been known as “Air Jordan,” the term “air jordan” would probably be worthless unless someone else used that term famously. Like Jordan, Advertising.com became known as Ad.com internally and externally, and many people associate the term Ad.com with Advertising.com. However, unlike the term “air jordan,” the term and domain name “Ad.com” has significant value besides its usage by Advertising.com.

As an entrepreneur and marketer, I can commiserate with all parties involved in the situation. The current Ad.com domain owner just wants the sale completed as expected, Moniker/Oversee.net wants the commission they are rightfully owed, Skenzo is worried that they are going to have to spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in addition to the purchase price to protect their new investment, and AOL wants to protect the brand they believe is rightfully theirs.

As a domain investor on the other hand, I am very concerned by this move by AOL, and it will make me more vigilant about researching the domain names I buy and develop.

Use Caution When Responding to Domain Inquiries

Every day, people receive inquires on their domain names. People ask if specific domain names are for sale and some make offers while others ask the domain owner at what price he would sell the domain name. Now more than ever, it’s important to carefully consider how you respond to domain inquiries. Andrew reported on the OpenDental.com UDRP today, and the panel had one startling opinion:

“Complainant offered to buy the disputed domain name from Respondent for $500-$5000.   Respondent’s engagement with Complainant in these offers and counter-offers is evidence of bad faith registration and use.”

So there you have it. If someone inquires about your domain name and you engage in offers and counter offers, you could put the domain name at risk. In my opinion, this is a crock!

Everything I own is for sale at the right price. If someone came to my apartment and asked to buy it, of course I would tell him that I’d sell it for the right price. If he offered me double the book value because he really wanted it, I would sell it ASAP and rent another apartment while my wife finishes graduate school. I am not looking to sell it and don’t want to sell it, but if he was making offers that made it worthwhile, I would consider it, despite the inconvenience it would cause.

Likewise, I would sell my domain names and websites for the right price. I don’t wish to sell any of my geodomain names right now, but I am trying to build a business to make money. If that involves selling my business and domain name for a considerable profit, sure I would consider selling it. I don’t see how negotiating the sale of a domain name or a business implies bad faith ownership of it.

I really think that the OpenDental.com decision is poor, and the language in its findings sets a very bad example that domain owners need to consider. Fortunately, one decision doesn’t necessarily mean others will follow, but it sure should be noted for the next time you receive an offer to sell a domain name.

Dolphins.com UDRP Update

10

Miami DolphinsAs reported last week, the Miami Dolphins filed a UDRP for the domain name, Dolphins.com. According to domain registrar and brand protection company, Mark Monitor, Dolphins.com is now owned by the National Football League (see screenshot below), although the DNS has not been changed nor the domain forwarded to the Miami Dolphins website.

A few days ago, I noticed that the status of the UDRP filing was listed as Suspended, and now the domain name has been transferred, despite the current PPC links. A Suspended proceeding generally means that the two sides either reached some sort of agreement about the UDRP proceeding or a lawsuit was filed to prevent a ruling.

Although I don’t have any details about what was worked out in private, perhaps it will be reported in a future public corporate filing.

Dolphins.com Whois

Recent Posts

Saw.com Announces $100 Million in Domain Name Deals

1
The Saw.com domain name sales brokerage and sales platform announced a milestone this morning. The company surpassed $100,000,000 in domain name deals. I presume...

That Company May Cease to Exist

1
I received a strong offer on one of my one word .com domain names last week. I declined, but in the process of doing...

Auction Platforms Shouldn’t Benefit from Default Bidders

13
If the winning bidder for a domain name auction does not pay and the auction platform offers the domain name to the next highest...

LTO is Betting on the Buyer and the Platform

2
When you agree to a lease-to-own (LTO) domain name deal, you’re making two bets: one on the buyer’s ability and willingness to complete the...

Andrew Rosener on Miss Understood Podcast

2
Andrew Rosener is one of the top domain brokers. I had to strike "one of" because I know as soon as I hit publish,...