| Domain Name Registrations Generally | | | | thedomain name to the mark owner or any third party |
| As a general rule, you can register any domain name | | | | for financialgain without having used, or having an intent |
| that is notalready registered (subject to trademark | | | | to use, the domainname in the bona fide offering of |
| considerationsdiscussed below). If your domain name is | | | | any goods or services, or theperson's prior conduct |
| sufficientlydistinctive, for example, jtdbizopps.com, the | | | | indicating a pattern of such conduct." |
| bit before the | | | | A common problem is identifying the culprit. In Jan |
| .com may also be a common law trademark (unless, | | | | Tallent- |
| of course, it'sregistered and then it's a registered | | | | Dandridge's case, for example, the only information |
| trademark). If you DO havea distinctive domain name, | | | | about theperpetrator Registrant: Dave Web |
| then the discussion in the nextsection applies to you. | | | | (JTDBIZOPPS-COM-DOM) Buy This Domain 5 |
| If you don't have a distinctive domain name, however, | | | | Tpagrichnery St ., # 33 |
| and bythis I mean a name that is "descriptive" or in | | | | Yerevan, Armenia 375010 AM 208.978.3555 Call me |
| general usage,for example, "home-business.com", then | | | | skeptical, but somehow I doubt that's a real name |
| this name will be neithera common law trademark nor | | | | andaddress. Fortunately, the Act has anticipated this |
| a registrable trademark. | | | | problem: |
| In this case, once you've lost your domain name | | | | "The owner of a mark may file an in rem civil action |
| registration,you are, not to put too fine a point on it, | | | | against adomain name [an "in rem" proceeding is an |
| screwed. You don'thave much in the way of recourse | | | | action against thething rather than against a defendant |
| other than for the "generic"legal avenues which may | | | | - in this context, itmeans that the court can make an |
| well be too expensive for you to pursue. | | | | order in relation to the domainname itself rather than |
| These avenues are discussed below. | | | | against Dave Web personally such asordering him to |
| => Domain Names and Trademarks | | | | surrender the domain name] ... ". |
| On the other hand, if you have a distinctive domain | | | | And as for remedies, assuming you are able to identify |
| name (i.e.,one that is not in common usage), then that | | | | yourparticular scumbag, these include injunctions and |
| name is also likelyto be a common law trademark | | | | damages |
| (unless, as stated above, you'veregistered it, in which | | | | (either actual or, in a case where your individual name |
| case it's a registered trademark. And,if you do have a | | | | is atissue, statutory damages of between $1,000 and |
| common law trademark, I would recommend thatyou | | | | $100,000 perdomain name). |
| register it. Registration can only strengthen your | | | | => Generic Legal Avenues |
| position.) | | | | Whether or not you can pursue an action under the |
| The law generally sides with the pre-existing | | | | Act, there area number of legal avenues open to |
| trademark ownerover the domain name holder. In | | | | anyone in Jan's situation (andby that, I mean, someone |
| addition, the U.S. has enactedthe federal | | | | who is using the domain name to pointto a site that |
| Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (the | | | | damages your reputation). |
| "Act"). Under the Act, you can sue a cybersquatter to | | | | First off, let's recognize this practice for what it is. |
| get backyour domain name and sometimes damages | | | | Extortion. Pure and simple. It's a crime. So is |
| to boot. So, what'sactionable under the Act? Here's an | | | | criminaldefamation. Write a strongly worded cease |
| extract from the Act itself: | | | | and desist letter tothe offender, threatening to report |
| "A person shall be liable in a civil action by the owner | | | | them to the District |
| of amark, including a personal name which is protected | | | | Attorney and/or the police and the Federal Trade |
| as a mark ...if, without regard to the goods or services | | | | Commission aswell as instituting a civil suit. You are |
| of the parties, thatperson  | | | | more likely to get aresult if the letter comes from your |
| (i) has a bad faith intent to profit from that mark ...; and | | | | attorney. |
| (ii) registers, traffics in, or uses a domain name that | | | | If the offender doesn't comply, report them. As for |
| Â | | | | what actionwill be taken, your guess is as good as |
| (I) in the case of a mark that is distinctive at the time | | | | mine but at least you'vedone what you can. |
| ofregistration of the domain name, is identical or | | | | If you have the resources to do so, you can also bring |
| confusinglysimilar to that mark; (II) in the case of a | | | | civilproceedings against the offender on the same |
| famous mark that isfamous at the time of registration | | | | grounds. Theconduct in question is egregious enough |
| of the domain name, isidentical or confusingly similar to | | | | that you may well getpunitive damages awarded in |
| or dilutive of that mark; or | | | | your favor. |
| (III) is a [registered] trademark ..." | | | | Finally, and I HATE to even suggest this, the |
| In terms of what constitutes "bad faith", the Act | | | | mostcost-effective option of all may be to pay what is |
| provides thatthe court may consider factors (among | | | | demanded. |
| others) such as: | | | | That at least gets the domain name back under |
| "The person's [i.e., the alleged cybersquatter's] intent | | | | YOUR control whereit belongs. And there's nothing to |
| todivert customers from the mark owner's online | | | | stop you turning around andreporting the individual in |
| location to a siteaccessible under the domain name | | | | question to the DA, police, FTCetc.. In fact, paying over |
| that could harm the goodwillrepresented by the mark, | | | | the money may be your best chance ofidentifying the |
| either for commercial gain or with theintent to | | | | perpetrator so you can initiate a criminalprosecution. |
| disparage the mark, by creating a likelihood ofconfusion | | | | Of course, all of this is damage control which is a |
| as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, orendorsement | | | | VERY poorsubstitute for prevention. So go back to |
| of the site; and | | | | Item 1. and calendaryour domain name due dates to |
| "the person's offer to transfer, sell, or otherwise assign | | | | avoid getting into this mess inthe first place. |