|
A Boost for Cybersquatters
March 5, 2003
When the Supreme Court ruled Monday that the sound-alike name of a Kentucky mom-and-pop sex toy shop was not enough to establish trademark violation against Victoria's Secret, the decision was seen as a serious blow to efforts by big business to curb cybersquatting.
In a landmark 9-0 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that there was no evidence that the 'Victor's Secret' store name diluted the brand and lessened the trademarks owned by the more popular 'Victoria's Secret'.
"The evidence in this case is insufficient to support summary judgment on the dilution count. There is a complete absence of evidence of any lessening of the Victoria's Secret mark's capacity to identify and distinguish goods or services sold in Victoria's Secret stores or advertised in its catalogs," the Supreme Court ruled.
"Any difficulties of proof that may be entailed in demonstrating actual dilution are not an acceptable reason for dispensing with proof of an essential element of a statutory violation," according to the judgment.
In rendering judgment, Justice John Paul Stevens said the mere fact a consumer might think of the big company when encountering a similar name is not enough to establish a trademark violation.
The Supreme Court decision could have a major influence on numerous domain name and cybersquatting squabbles that have littered the Internet landscape.
More details at: http://www.atnewyork.com/news/article.php/2105271
|
