• Welcome to DNForum.com - Domain Investor Forum, Free Domain Marketplace and a community for 45+ domain pros
    If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the oldest global domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 45,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, using our free in-house built tools, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.

Federal Trademark Dilution Act (FTDA)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dominata

New Member
The Originals
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2002
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I was wondering if one of our legal friends here could possibly comment on the changes of the Federal Trademark Dilution Act (FTDA). of September 26, 2006
and how it would affect the Domain community.

What should we be careful of etc. and possibly predict how icann will digest these changes.
 
"Section 43(c)(3)(A) as amended specifically lists comparative advertising as excluded from dilution claims, and also excludes uses of a famous mark that parody, criticize or comment on the owner of the mark."

License to use TM names for PPC?

- Rob
 
that has nothing to do with PPC.. comparative pricing is when a McDonalds commercial says the Big Mac(r) cost 2.99 while the Whopper(r) is 3.59... Advertising like this would be excluded... nothing to do with PPC.. unless you are saying PPC criticize. comment or is a parady..
 
I wasn't sure, hence the question mark – thanks for clearing that up.

I thought "comparative advertising" would be open to interpretation but it would seem the rules relating to it are already clearly defined…

- It must not be misleading.
- It must compare goods or services for the same needs or purpose.
- It must objectively compare one or more of the properties, including the price, of the goods or services.
- It must not not create confusion in the marketplace.
- It must not discredit or denigrate the trade marks, trade names, goods or similar of a competitor. In relation to designations of origin, the comparison must be between products having the same designation of origin.
- It must not take advantage of the reputation of a trade mark, trade name or similar of a competitor.
- It does not set out to suggest that a product is an imitation or replica of an original product.

- Rob
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom