An Interesting Decision

[namestrands]

http://www.theiplawblog.com/archives/-trademark-law-settlement-in-keyword-trademark-dispute.html

 

[DNQuest.com]

Amazing. Let the flood gates open.

 

[Devil Dog]

"Since the meta tags and the Google AdWords program are invisible to the public and do not identify the source of the goods, there can be no “use” of the trademark. "

What?

 

[cyberlaw]

I think it is likely that the inconsistency in opinions will be resolved in favor of the conclusion that any use of a trademark to drive traffic to a competitor's site will be prohibited. It may take 15 years for that to shake out, but I suspect that will be the prevailing viewpoint once courts start to see these issues a bit more often.

 

[Dave Zan]

More biz for Google.

 

[Focus]

woot.

 

[Theo]

I like this disclaimer at the bottom of Matched.com

Disclaimer: The registrant of this domain maintains no relationship with third party advertisers that may appear on this website. Reference to or the appearance of any particular service or trade mark is not controlled by registrant and does not constitute or imply its association, endorsement or recommendation.

 

[Fearless]

I like this disclaimer at the bottom of Matched.com

Click on an ad. You could use a date.

 

[Raider]

I like this disclaimer at the bottom of Matched.com

Are disclaimers such as this one, given any merit or are they completely discounted in a TM dispute?

 

[H2FC]

very interesting subject....I'm anxious to see how the supreme court rules on it.

 

[Dave Zan]

Are disclaimers such as this one, given any merit or are they completely discounted in a TM dispute?

http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview/index.html#35

3.5 What is the role of a disclaimer on the web page of a disputed domain name?

Consensus view: The existence of a disclaimer cannot cure bad faith, when bad faith has been established by other factors. A disclaimer can also show that the respondent had prior knowledge of the complainant’s trademark. However a disclaimer is sometimes found to support other factors indicating good faith or legitimate interest.

Relevant decisions:
Estée Lauder Inc. v. estelauder.com, estelauder.net and Jeff Hanna D2000-0869, Transfer
Arthur Guinness Son & Co. (Dublin) Limited v. Dejan Macesic D2000-1698, Transfer
Besiktas Jimnastik Kulubu Dernegi v. Mehmet Tolga Avcioglu D2003-0035, Denied
Pliva, Inc. v. Eric Kaiser D2003-0316, Transfer

 

[Theo]

Are disclaimers such as this one, given any merit or are they completely discounted in a TM dispute?

Probably no merit.

Click on an ad. You could use a date.

Do you own the domain, Greg?