The growth and increasingly mainstream appeal of various aspects of the Internet could have a lasting effect on a firm's marketing mix. The authors address one of the external environmental factors that marketing and brand managers, as well as public policymakers, should continually monitor as the online community further develops: trademark law. As managers attempt to leverage the value of the trademarked brand, the authors examine the impact of the current state of technology and the law to understand the reach of current legal interpretations and the implications for present and future trademark strategy online.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Amazon.com, Inc. v. CITI Services, Inc. (1999), No. 99–543 (D. Delaware, August 18).
2.
America Online v. Christian Brothers et al. (1999), 98 Civ. 8959 (S.D.N.Y., December 9).
3.
America Online v. IMS (1998), 24 F. Supp. 2d 548.
4.
American Express v. American Express Limousine Service (1991), 772 F. Supp. 729 (E.D.N.Y. 1991).
5.
American Homecare Federation, Inc. v. Paragon Scientific Corporation et al. (1998), 1998 U.S. Dist. Lexis 17962 (D. Connecticut, October 26).
6.
AndersGeorge (1999), “Companies: Best 1-Year Performer: Amazon.com Inc.,”Wall Street Journal, (February 25), Eastern edition, R2.
7.
Anticounterfeiting Consumer Protection Act (1996), Public Law 104–152.
8.
Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (1999), Public Law 106–113 (November 29).
9.
Archdiocese of St. Louis v. Internet Entertainment Group (1999), 1999 Westlaw 66022 (E.D. Missouri).
10.
Atlantic Richfield Company v. Arco Globus International Company (1997), 95 Civ. 6361.
11.
Avon v. Carnetta Wong (1996), CV-96–0451 (E.D. New York).
12.
Bally Total Fitness Holding Corporation v. Andrew S. Faber (1998), 29 F. Supp. 2d 1161.
13.
Bensusan Restaurant Corp. v. King (1996), 937 F. Supp. 295.
14.
Brookfield Communications, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp. (1999), No. 98–56918 (9th Circuit, April 22).
15.
Carnival Corporation v. Seascape Casino Cruises, Inc. (1999), 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17546 (S.D. Florida, October 26).
16.
ClarkDon, and ZeiglerBart (1998), “Digits,”Wall Street Journal, (September 24), B4, col. 2.
17.
Clue Computing v. Network Solutions (1996), No. 96-D-1530 (D. Colorado).
18.
CMG Worldwide, Inc. v. American Legends et al. (1996), No. 49D109607 (Ind., Marion County, filed Jul. 17).
19.
ColliverVictoria (1999), “Tongues Tangle in Web Site War,”San Francisco Examiner, (October 13), (accessed December 27), [available at www.examiner.com/991013/1013.htm].
20.
CompuServe v. Patterson (1996), 89 F.3d 1257.
21.
Concert Concept (1997), Court of Appeal of Berlin 5 U 659/97 (March 25).
22.
Cybersell, Inc. v. Cybersell, Inc. (1997), 130 F. 3d. 414.
23.
Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders, Inc. v. Pussycat Cinema, Ltd. (1979), 604 F.2d 200.
24.
Data Concepts, Inc. v. Digital Consulting, Inc. (1997), Civ. No. 3–96–0429 (M.D. Tenn. January 31).
25.
Data Concepts, Inc. v. Digital Consulting, Inc. (1998), 96–00429 (6th Circuit, August 4).
26.
Dennison Corp. v. Sumpton et al. (1998), 999 F. Supp. 1337.
27.
Dennison Corp. v. Sumpton et al. (1999), No. 98–55810 (9th Circuit, August 23).
28.
Estee Lauder, Inc. v. The Fragrance Counter (1999), No. 99 Civ. 0382 RWS (S.D.N.Y. amended complaint filed March 5, 1999).
29.
Federal Trademark Dilution Act (1995), 15 USCA 1125 Supp. 1997.
30.
Fernandez v. McDaniel Controls Inc. (1998), CV. No. 97–01596 D. Hawaii (March 24).
31.
Ford Motor Company v. Robert Lane (1999), 1999 U.S. Dist. Lexis 13736 (September 7).
Geoffrey Inc. v. Stratton (1992), 113 S.Ct. 153 1992.
34.
Giacalone v. Network Solutions Inc. (1996), C-96–20434 (N.D. California).
35.
GolsonBarry (1999), “The Year on the Net!”Yahoo! Internet Life, 5(January), 87.
36.
Hard Rock Cafe v. Peter Morton (1999), 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13760.
37.
Harley-Davidson Motor Co. v. Iron Eagle of Central Florida, Inc. (1997), 973 F. Supp. 1421.
38.
HerbeckDan (2000), “Judge Bars Web Site Used to Criticize the News,”Buffalo News, (March 1), 4B.
39.
Heroes, Inc. v. Heroes Foundation (1996), 958 F. Supp. 1 (D.D.C.); amended by No. Civ.A. 96–1260 (TAF) (1997).
40.
HQM v. William B. Hatfield (1999), 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18598 (December 2).
41.
Inset Systems, Inc. v. Instruction Set, Inc. (1996), D. Conn., 937 F. Supp. 161.
42.
Insituform Technologies Inc. et al. v. National Envirotech Group LLC et al. (1997), Civ. No. N7-2064 (E.D. La., Aug. 27).
43.
Intermatic Inc. v. Toeppen (1996), 947 F. Supp. 1227.
44.
Interstellar Starship Services v. Epix (1997), 983 F.Supp. 1331.
45.
Interstellar Starship Services v. Epix (1999), 184 F.2d 1107 (9th Cir., July 19).
46.
JacobusPatricia (1999), “Quokka, New Zealanders Settle Domain Name Complaint,”Cnet News, (December 22), (accessed March 27, 2000), [available at news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-1504357.html].
47.
Jews for Jesus v. Brodsky (1998a), 993 F. Supp. 282 (D.N.J.).
48.
Jews for Jesus v. Brodsky (1998b), 159 F.3d 1351 (3rd Circuit).
49.
Juno Online v. Juno Lighting (1997), 979 F. Supp. 684 (N.D. Illinois).
50.
KoppSteven W., and SuterTracy A. (1998), “Developments in Copyright Policy and Network Technologies: The First Generation,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 17(Fall), 303–12.
51.
KoppSteven W., and SuterTracy A. (1999), “Fox as the Hound: The Issue of ‘Fan Sites’ on the Web and the Protection of Intellectual Property,” in Enhancing Knowledge Development in Marketing, Vol. 10, StephenP. Brown, and SudharshanD., eds. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 167–68.
52.
LammersDirk (1999), “Domain Name Tugs of War: David and Goliath Battles over Web Addresses Can Be Downright Silly,”Tampa Tribune, (February 19), 42.
53.
Lanham Act (1946), 60 Stat. 427.
54.
L.L. Bean v. Drake Publishers, Inc. (1987), 811 F.2d 26.
55.
Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Network Solutions, Inc. (1997), 985 F. Supp. 949 (C.D. California).
56.
Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Network Solutions, Inc. (1999), 194 F.3d 980 (9th Circuit).
57.
Maritz, Inc. v. Cybergold, Inc. (1996), 947 F. Supp. 1328.
MTV Networks v. Adam Curry (1994), 867 F. Supp. 202 (S.D.N.Y).
60.
MuellerMilton (1998), “Domain Names and Trademarks,” paper presented at Conference on Corporate Domain Names, New York (October 13).
61.
MurphyShelley (1999), “Harvard Seeks Rights to Own Name in Cyber Suit,”Boston Globe, (December 8), B1.
62.
New York State Society of CPAs v. Eric Louis Associates (1999), 79 F. Supp. 2d 331 (S.D.N.Y.).
63.
New York Times (1999), “Litigants Use Law to Stake Their Claim in Cyberspace,” (December 9), C2.
64.
Niton Corp. v. Radiation Monitoring Devices, Inc. (1998), Civil Action No. 98-11629-REK (November 18).
65.
Oppedahl & Larson v. Advance Concepts et al. (1997), Civ. No. 97-Z-1592 D.C. Colo. (December 19).
66.
PaineWebber, Inc. v. WWWPainewebber.com (1999), 1999 U.S. Dist. Lexis 6552 (E.D. Va., April 9).
67.
Panavision International, L.P. v. Toeppen (1996), 945 F. Supp. 1296.
68.
Patmont Motor Works, Inc. v. Gateway Marine, Inc. et al. (1997), No. C96-2703, (N.D. Cal. December 18).
69.
Pew Research (1998), “The Internet Audience Goes Ordinary,” (accessed March 27, 2000), [available at www.people-press.org/tech98sum.htm].
70.
Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Calvin Designer Label (1997), 985 F. Supp. 1220.
71.
Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Chuckleberry Publishing, Inc. (1996), 939 F. Supp. 1032 (S.D.N.Y.).
72.
Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Frena (1993), 839 F. Supp. 1552 (M.D. Fla.).
73.
Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Netscape Communications (1999), 55 F. Supp. 2d 1070.
74.
Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Russ Hardenburgh (1997), 982 F. Supp. 503.
75.
Playboy Enterprises Inc. v. Universal Tel-A-Talk, Inc. et al. (1998a), 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8231 (E.D. Pennsylvania, June 3).
76.
Playboy Enterprises Inc. v. Universal Tel-A-Talk, Inc. et al. (1998b), 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17282 (E.D. Pennsylvania, November 3).
77.
Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Welles (1998a), U.S. Dist. Lexis 9180 (S.D. Ca. May 21).
78.
Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Welles (1998b), 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 27739 (9th Circuit, October 27).
79.
Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Welles (1999), No. 98–0413 (S.D. Cal. Aug.).
80.
PollackAndrew (1999), “What's in a Cybername? $7.5 Million for the Right Address,”New York Times, (November 30), C8.
81.
Porsche Cars North America v. Porsch.com et al. (1999), 51 F. Supp. 2d 707 (June 9).
82.
Pres-Kap v. System One (1994), 636 So. 2d 1351 (Florida, 3rd Dist.).
83.
QuelchJohn A., and KleinLisa R. (1996), “The Internet and International Marketing,”Sloan Management Review, 37(3), 60–75.
84.
Reddy Communications, Inc. v. Environmental Action Foundation (1979), 477 F. Supp. 936.
85.
San Jose Mercury News v. Royal (1999), No. C-99–20931 (N.D. California, September 13).
86.
Seattle Times (1999), “Greek Web Site Ordered to Stop Using Amazon,” (November 13), B1.
87.
Sega Entertainers Ltd. v. MAPHIA (1996), 948 F. Supp. 923.
88.
Smith v. Chanel Inc. (1968), 402 F.2d 562.
89.
Software Inc. v. Reliability Research Inc. (1986), 631 F. Supp. C.D. Cal.
90.
Star Markets Ltd. v. Texaco Inc. (1996), 950 F. Supp. 1030.
91.
Steele v. Bulova Watch Co. (1952), 344 U.S. 280.
92.
Telephone Audio Productions v. Smith (1998), No. 3:97-CV-0863–P (N.D. Texas, March 26).
93.
Ticketmaster v. Microsoft (1997), 97-3055 DDP (Central District of California, filed April 29).
94.
Tim McGraw, et al. v. Jim Salmon (1998), 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10987 (C.D. California, June 30).
95.
Toys “R” Us, Inc. v. Akkaoui (1996), 40 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1836 (N.D. Cal.).
96.
Toys “R” Us, Inc. v. Feinberg (1998), 98 Civ. 2780 (SDNY).
97.
Toys “R” Us, Inc. v. Feinberg (1999), 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 29833 (November 10).
98.
Trademark Law Revision Act (1988), Pub. L. No. 100–667, 102 Stat. 3935.
99.
Umbro v. 3263851 Canada Inc. (1999), Case No. (Law) 174388, (Circuit Court of Virginia, February 3).
100.
Uncas Mfg. Co. v. Clark & Coombs Co. (1962), 309 F. 2d 818.
101.
USA Today (1998), “This Pokey Isn't That Pokey,” (May 13) 6D.
102.
Wall Street Journal (1997), “U.S. School Wins French Web Suit,” (June 10), 12A.
103.
Wall Street Journal (1999), “Carsdirect.com: Autos.com Domain Name Is Bought for $2.2 Million,” (December 15), A1.
104.
Washington Post Co. et al. v. TotalNews Inc. (1997), 97 Civ. 1190 S.D.N.Y.
105.
Westchester Media Company, L.P. et al. v. PRL USA Holdings, Inc. et al. (1999), Civil Action No. H-97–3278, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12333 (Southern District of Texas, August 4).
106.
WIPO (1999), The Management of Internet Names and Addresses: Intellectual Property Issues.Geneva: World Intellectual Property Organization.
