Welcome to Patents and Trademarks Guide
Us Patents Publish Application Day Article
This is a selection made from among articles on Us Patents Publish Application Day. For a permanent link to this article, or to bookmark it for future reading, click here.
Legal Issues About Trademarks And Domain Names
from: Peter Goldberg
Trade marks are a name or symbol that are used to distinguish the goods of services of a particular company from others.
Similar to copyrights and other signs of intellectual property, the effects of the trademark system is territorial. This means, that each country has its own trademark system. A brand name like Machine Head may be owned by one person in the United Kingdom and by another, totally unrelated, person in the United States.
The domain name system, which is putting most of its emphasis on the .com title as the international domain, does not really jive well with the trade mark system because of the latter’s fundamental definition of “ownership.”
A case in point is the Prince vs Prince suit. Prince, the US-based manufacturers of sports goods, challenged the use of the www.prince.com domain name by a British computer consultancy company. The said company registered the domain in good faith and have been using it. The Prince sports goods company, which has no registered UK trademark, threatened to sue the British company for US trademark infringement. The latter counter-sued in the UK for the unwarranted threats regarding trademark infringement. They eventually won and the US company had to contend with just using the domain name www.princetennis.com.
Alternatively, a different scenario where the trademark owner will most likely prevail over a domain name holder’s rights is in the case of Marks & Spencer vs One in a Million. This particular case was elevated to the English High Court in 1997 when various trademark holders, including the world-famous UK retailer Marks & Spencer, sued One In A Million, a company who accumulated a number of domain names under the well-known trademarks like Sainsburys, Virgin, Marks & Spencer, and Cellnet. These domain names, and others, were bought with the express goal of selling them again to the trademark owners. The High Court decided that One In A Million be required to relinquish their claim on the said domain names. This decision was further upheld by the Court of Appeal.
The One In A Million company’s basis of argument was that domain name registrations were first come, first served”, thus, the trademark owners do not have any rights to the domain names.
Based on the two actual court cases we can build up a clear picture about the interrelation of trademarks and domain names.
In general, domains that have no trademark significance can be acquired by the entity who registered them first. Continuous use of this non-trademarked name will allow the holder to build a reputation on the name. When the situation is between to legitimate companies who have a right to the name then, as with the stipulation of most laws in most countries, the first person who registers will get the domain. However, a registrant to a domain that is also a subject of a trademark and who does not have any entitlements is going to be forbidden based on the laws of most countries. For more information please visit http://www.dolphinformations.co.uk.
About The Author
Peter Goldberg runs the website http://www.dolphinformations.co.uk which is your expert resource for all business related issues.
Us Patents Publish Application Day News
United States: IP Update - December 2008 - Mondaq News Alerts (registration)
United States: IP Update - December 2008 Mondaq News Alerts (registration), UK - Miyazaki filed a patent application claiming a large printer and various components of that printer. The examiner rejected various claims, asserting that ... |
RegeneRx Reports Phase II Pressure Ulcer Trial Results - Earthtimes (press release)
RegeneRx Reports Phase II Pressure Ulcer Trial Results Earthtimes (press release), UK - RegeneRx holds over 60 world-wide patents and patent applications related to novel peptides and is currently sponsoring three Phase II chronic dermal wound ... |
European Union: Brussels Update - EU & Competition (January 2009) - Mondaq News Alerts (registration)
European Union: Brussels Update - EU & Competition (January 2009) Mondaq News Alerts (registration), UK - Among the practices the Commission has highlighted are: the use by originating companies of multiple patent applications for the same medicine (patent ... |
Discovery Labs' Surfaxin(r) Phase 2 BPD Clinical Trial Results ... - Reuters
Discovery Labs' Surfaxin(r) Phase 2 BPD Clinical Trial Results ... Reuters - The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has established April 17, 2009 as its target date to complete its review of this new drug application (NDA) and ... |
Microsoft wants to patent "pay-as-you-use" computer leasing - Ars Technica
Microsoft wants to patent "pay-as-you-use" computer leasing Ars Technica, MA - By Joel Hruska | Published: December 29, 2008 - 03:32PM CT A recent Microsoft patent application dating back to July 2007 has shed light on what the company ... Microsoft Files for Pay-As-You-Go Computing Patent Microsoft outlines vision of pay-as-you-go computing Pay-as-you-go computer sounds like a headache |
US Patent Office Grants Patent for Destiny Media's Digital Media ... - MarketWatch
US Patent Office Grants Patent for Destiny Media's Digital Media ... MarketWatch - This second patent application was published in April, 2008 and is currently in front of a USPTO examiner for consideration. These two technologies provide ... |
Studies Examine Inflammatory Biomarker in Prevention and ... - Journal of American Medical Association (subscription)
Studies Examine Inflammatory Biomarker in Prevention and ... Journal of American Medical Association (subscription), IL - And rosuvastatin is still under patent protection and costs an estimated $3.45 a day, suggesting it will cost about $285 000 to prevent 1 cardiovascular ... |