Chilling Effects
Home Weather Reports Report Receiving a Cease and Desist Notice Search the Database Topics
Sending
Topic HomeFAQsMonitoring the legal climate for Internet activity
Berkman Center for Internet & Society
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > Domain Names and Trademarks > Notices > KaZaAck Attack (NoticeID 673, http://chillingeffects.org/N/673) Printer-friendly version

KaZaAck Attack

June 12, 2003

 

Sender Information:
Sharman License Holdings Limited (KaZaA)
Sent by: [Private]
Phillips Fox
Sydney NSW 2000, DX 107 Sy, Australia

Recipient Information:
[Private]
TEAM DK
Newport Beach, CA, 92662, USA


Sent via: email
Re: dietk.com

Dear Registrant
dietk.com

We act for Sharman License Holdings Limited (Sharman).

It has come to our client's attention that you have obtained a license for the domain name dietk.com with the domain name administrator Registerfly.com. As you are no doubt aware, our client has used the name KAZAA in connection with the Kazaa Media Desktop software (the Software), other products and its business throughout the world. Our client has a substantial reputation and rights in the name KAZAA in relevant jurisdictions throughout the world. Sharman is the owner of the domain name "kazaa.com."

As the owner of the name KAZAA, and all rights in KAZAA, our client is entitled to be the licensee of the corresponding domain names that incorporate the word KAZAA or are otherwise substantially identical or deceptively similar to KAZAA, in particular, the domain name dietk.com.

You have no legitimate entitlement to use the name KAZAA, or any other name that is otherwise substantially identical or deceptively similar to KAZAA and in particular, the domain name dietk.com.

You also have no right to offer any software or other product or services from the website located at the URL http://dietk.com under or by reference to the name KAZAA, or any other name that is otherwise substantially identical or deceptively similar to KAZAA.

Your license of the domain name dietk.com was obtained in bad faith. Your conduct is an infringement of our client's legitimate rights and interests in the name KAZAA.

Your offer, through your website, unauthorised and infringing versions of the Software. To the extent to which you have reproduced the source code or object code of the Software, or are communicating that source code or object code to members of the public, you are doing so without our client's permission. This conduct infringes our client's copyright in the Software throughout the world.

Further, by making available unauthorised versions of the Software by or under reference to names that include KAZAA or are otherwise substantially identical or deceptively similar to that name, you are seeking to trade on our client's significant and valuable reputation, and to appropriate to yourself, without our client's approval, our client's reputation. This also infringes our client's rights.

Our client reserves its rights to take further action against you, in any relevant jurisdiction, in relation to each example of these infringing activities. Our client requires this infringing activity to cease immediately and for you to undertake to our client in writing to not engage in that activity, or any other activity that infringes our client's rights.

Without prejudice to any other rights, our client requires that you immediately transfer your license to the domain name dietk.com to Sharman. To effect this transfer, our client requires you to complete the transfer of ownership forms located at your registrar's website, www.registerfly.com, and transfer the domain name to:
(Private)

You must complete the transfer of the domain name license to Sharman, including payment of any transfer fee, no later than Friday, 20 June 2003.

You must also immediately undertake to our client in writing that you will not register or seek to register in the future any other domain name, anywhere in the world, that incorporates the word KAZAA or any other name that is substantially identical or deceptively similar to KAZAA.

If you do not effect the transfer and give the required undertaking to us by the required date, we are instructed to institute domain name dispute proceedings in accordance with ICANN's Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy. If that is necessary, our client reserves its rights in respect of the loss and damage that it has suffered, and continues to suffer, as a result of your wrongful conduct and bad faith.

You are now formally on notice of our client's rights. This letter may be used as evidence of your knowledge in any domain name dispute proceedings or any proceedings for damages or an account of profits.

We await receipt of the undertaking and confirmation of the transfer from you.

Yours faithfully,
(Private)

 
FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]


Question: How was I supposed to know that my domain violates somebody else

Answer: It is the domain name registrant


[back to notice text]


Question: What is the bare minimum of trademark law that I have to understand to decipher this C&D?

Answer: Your opponent should say that your mark is causing consumer confusion or is likely to cause consumer confusion. Or it should mention it's famousness and complain of dilution or tarnishment. (If the C&D does not say this, then no trademark claim may actually exist, and you can rest assured that your opponent is engaging in scare tactics or has hired a highly incompetent attorney). A mark protects more than identical copying, it extends to anything that is confusingly similar, even if it isn't exactly the same.

Functioning in a quasi-magical talisman-like capacity, trademarks designate the source or quality of goods or services. For this reason, the law protects against confusion in the market place by ensuring that marks on the same or similar products or services are sufficiently different. The law also protects famous marks against dilution of value and tarnishment of the reputation of the goods or services on which it appears or the source of those products, regardless of any confusion.

You can roughly assess the validity of your opponent?s claim of confusion by classifying the marks involved. A trademark can fall into one of 5 categories. It can be: (1) fanciful; (2) arbitrary; (3) suggestive; (4) descriptive; or (5) generic. Not all of these varieties of marks are entitled to the same level, or indeed any level, of trademark protection.

A fanciful mark is a mark someone made up; examples include KODAK or H?AGEN-DAZS. An arbitrary mark is a known term applied to a completely unrelated product or service; for instance, AMAZON.com for an online book-store cum one-stop shopping site or APPLE for computers. Fanciful and arbitrary marks are considered strong marks and garner substantial trademark protection.

A suggestive mark is one that hints at the product, but which requires an act of imagination to make the connection: COPPERTONE for sun tan lotion or PENGUIN for coolers or refrigerators are examples. Suggestive marks are also strong marks and receive protection.

A descriptive mark, predictably, describes the product: HOLIDAY INN describes a vacation hotel and FISH-FRI describes batter for frying fish. Descriptive marks do not receive any trademark protection unless their user has used them in commerce and has built up secondary meaning. "Secondary meaning" occurs when consumers identify the goods or services on which the descriptive term appears with a single source. In other words, if consumers know that HOLIDAY INN hotels are all affiliated with a single source, then the mark has secondary meaning and receives trademark protection.

Finally, generic marks simply designate the variety of goods involved: for example, "cola" used on soft drinks and "perfume" on perfume are both generic terms. Generic marks never receive any trademark protection; they are free for everybody to use. (Keep in mind, though, that "Cola" on a nightclub is arbitrary, and therefore receives protection).

If your opponent is complaining that you have used the word "bakery" for a bake shop or "car" for a car repair shop, then you can safely guess that the c & d is baseless. On the other hand, if your opponent is concerned about the fact that both of you use of the term "Sweet Pickles" on alpaca sweaters, then the c & d may have some merit.

There are a few more wrinkles as well. Some marks are word marks (text only) and others are design marks (images which may or may not include text). Design marks do not provide independent protectin for the text incorporated in the design. So if the mark is only a design mark, it doesn't prevent others from using the text so long as they don't copy the design elements.


[back to notice text]


Question: What implication does alleged confusion have on claims of trademark infringement?

Answer: A mark that is confusingly similar so closely resembles a registered trademark that it is likely to confuse consumers as to the source of the product or service. Consumers could be likely to believe that the product with the confusingly similar mark is produced by the organization that holds the registered mark. Someone who holds a confusingly similar mark benefits from the good will associated with the registered mark and can lure customers to his/her product or service instead. Infringement is determined by whether your mark is confusingly similar to a registered mark. The factors that determine infringement include:

  • proof of actual confusion
  • strength of the established mark
  • proximity of the goods in the marketplace
  • similarity of the marks? sound
  • appearance and meaning
  • how the goods are marketed
  • type of product and how discerning the customer is
  • intent behind selecting the mark
  • likelihood of expansion in the market of the goods


[back to notice text]


Question: Is it possible to hold a domain name in good faith even if it is identical or confusingly similar to another's trademark?

Answer: The ACPA is forgiving of legitimate uses of domain names. There is less likely to be a violation of the Act if the domain name holder actually has some intellectual property rights in the name, or if the person has previously used the domain name in connection with bona fide offering of goods or services. Operating a domain name to which you have fairly entrenched trademark rights, or having operated a sales website under the domain name for a long time, is somewhat safer.

Take note, however, that this safety is illusory if your domain name resembles (or is) a famous mark. Thus an Internet service provider, Virtual Works, lost a case to Volkswagen, over its domain name www.vw.net, because the "VW" mark is famous, even though VW is the abbreviation of Virtual Works, and even though they had operated the site for several years.

If your domain name is your own name, or a name by which you are often referred, this is more likely to be deemed a good faith use. Edwin Von Aschenbach will probably be safe in registering www.vonaschenbach.com, even if Von Aschenbach, Co., manufactures high quality desks and "Von Aschenbach" is a trademark in the sale of desks. Edwin Pepsy should be more careful.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is "bad faith" registration or use?

Answer: Facts that are considered as evidence of bad faith are described in the UDRP Policy. They include acquiring the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling or renting it to the mark owner (or the mark owner


[back to notice text]


Question: Where can I get more information?

Answer: The following websites provide basic information related to the UDRP:


The UDRP Policy: http://www.icann.org/udrp/udrp-policy-24oct99.htm
The UDRP Rules of Procedure: http://www.icann.org/udrp/udrp-rules-24oct99.htm
Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre: http://www.hkiac.org/main.html
CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution: http://www.cpradr.org/home1.htm
The National Arbitration Forum: http://www.arbforum.com/
World Intellectual Property Organization http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/


[back to notice text]


Question: Is all copying piracy?

Answer: No. Copyright gives the owner exclusive rights to reproduce, adapt, publicly distribute, perform and display their work. Nonetheless, the law allows "fair use" of copyrighted material. Fair use permits, in certain circumstances, the use or copying of all or a portion of a copyrighted work without the permission of the owner. Copyrighted works may be used for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. To decide whether a use is "fair use" or not, courts consider, in part:
(1) the purpose and character of the use (including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes);
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work (giving creative works more protection than factual works);
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole (including size and quality- i.e. Does the portion represent the "heart" of the work); and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Courts balance these factors, placing an emphasis on the fourth, however rulings have been unpredictable. Parody may be protected by fair use where the user is actually making a comment on or criticism of the copyrighted material, even if a profit is made from the use. Still, distributing copyrighted software will rarely be fair use because people will use those copies instead of buying the software from the legitimate vendor.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is unfair competition?

Answer: "Unfair competition" covers a wide range of kinds of unjust business behavior---so many kinds, in fact, that it is impossible to give one simple general definition. In essence, unfair competition means trademark infringement or false advertising to confuse the public. In most states, only commercial competitors can be engaged in "unfair competition."


[back to notice text]


Question: Can the owner of a foreign trademark make any claim against me?

Answer: Trademark rights are limited to the territory of the government that grants them. The owner of a French trademark, for example, cannot block someone else from using the same term in New York. However many courts around the world have held that they have authority to block Internet material because it "invades" their territory.

Can a foreign court order be enforced against you? Maybe. If you have assets in that country, they could be seized. If you visit that location, you could be arrested. If your website host has assets in the foreign jurisdiction, however, the host might delete your material to avoid liability. Domain names registered in certain TLDs (such as .com, .org and .net) can be lost to foreign mark owners under the UDRP, the special ICANN-imposed dispute procedure which protects every trademark owner in every country.

If the French trademark owner also has a US mark, then it can sue you in US courts, but only under the US mark rights and only for the kind of activity that would be an infringement under US trademark laws. US law protects free speech rights much more strongly than most foreign nations.

The truth is that anyone can make a claim even if a court would immediately reject it. The mere threat of a claim is often enough to cause the person receiving the threat to give up when s/he doesn't understand his rights.


[back to notice text]


Question: What does the "reservation of rights" language mean? What are they "waiving" at me?

Answer: Many C&Ds will say something like, "This letter shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any rights or remedies, which are expressly reserved." This is just legalese for saying, "Even if you do what we ask in this letter, we can still sue you later." The language is standard; do not be alarmed. Litigation is extremely unpleasant, and unless your opponent is irrational (always a distinct possibility, of course), it will not bring litigation after it has obtained what it wants.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is this laundry list of things the C&D says will happen if I don't obey?

Answer: Your opponent may describe a parade of horribles to demonstrate with exquisite detail what it will do to you unless you capitulate. This list generally includes, but is not limited to:
(1) ceasing use of the allegedly infringing mark or surrendering the domain name;
(2) rendering an accounting;
(3) posting corrective advertising;
(4) obtaining an injunction;
(5) recovering costs and fees.

Though these things sound awful, they are not medieval tortures (although that may be a function of the fact that Torquemada never thought of them).

Ceasing use of the mark is self-explanatory: your opponent wants you to stop using the mark. Your opponent might also ask you to surrender your domain name if they believe the domain name causes (or is likely to cause) confusion with their trademark. For example, under ICANN rules (the UDRP), you may have to surrender your domain name if the following three conditions are satisfied:
(1) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to your opponent?s;
(2) you have no legitimate right or interest in the name (in other words, you are not using the name to conduct a bona fide business or for non-commercial fair use purposes); and
(3) your name is registered and used in bad faith.

An accounting basically means that you disclose the following information to your opponent:
(1) the date you began using the allegedly infringing mark;
(2) the names of individuals who knew of the use when it began;
(3) the amount of traffic at your web site or business at your store; and
(4) your profits and revenues during the time you used the allegedly infringing mark.

Corrective advertising means you give notice to the public that you were using a mark confusingly similar to your opponent?s, and that you are not affiliated with your opponent.

An injunction is a judicial order to do something. An injunction can prevent you from using the allegedly infringing trademark.

Some provisions of the Lanham Act permit a trademark holder to recover attorney?s fees and court costs from an infringer.

That your opponent has listed these various remedies does not mean that it is entitled to them; do not confuse the smorgasbord of legal options with your opponent?s right to inflict any of them on you.


Topic maintained by Berkman Center for Internet & Society

Topic Frequently Asked Questions (and Answers)
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse - www.chillingeffects.org
disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts