Intellectual Property Forum The Intellectual Property Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New registrations are now permitted.

Author Topic: C & D letter from a trademark that is not yet approved  (Read 1901 times)

A blogging Mommy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
    • Email

Hi Everyone,

I have a blog called xyz.com!  I received a message from a person that has a website called yz.com.  I did not know that this website existed before creating my blog.  My blog  name is VERY descriptive to what I write about.  While the other website is not even related to what they are offering.

The email I received from yz.com said they wanted to buy my site, but by that time, I already had been quite successful and did not want to part with the amount they offered.  I told them to come back with a new offer, and the amount came up a bit, but is not nearly close to what I had in mind for my domain name - since I figure I would be making that amount in just over a year through advertising.

I then received a nasty C & D letter, saying I was violating trademark law.  It turns out they do not have a trademark as of yet, they have only applied.  They had applied an abandoned for a trademark a few years before as well.

They claim that all my traffic is coming up from people searching their key word, although this looks true with Alexa - Alexa only shows search hits for people who have the toolbar installed.  When I look under my keyword searches, it has not been the number once search for over a month. Anything related to their name is only 0.8% of my traffic! The C & D letter also has the name Alexa website misspelled (FYI)

Since they are not yet a registered Trademark, what are my options and do they have any chance of winning if they take me to court?  I am very attached to my website and it is worth a lot to me, and offers a different service than theres.  They are in US and I am in Canada, but have mostly US readers.

Thanks for your help,

A Blogging Mommy!
Logged

Kaitlin

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 740
    • View Profile
Re: C & D letter from a trademark that is not yet approved
« Reply #1 on: 07-26-09 at 09:17 am »

Hi,

Hopefully someone with more practical experience with domain names will jump in with more information, since domain names have their own peculiar wrinkles in the law, but I'll try to start you off with some basic trademark principles.  (And I am assuming that they had their website up -- or at least were using their mark in commerce -- before you began your blog.)

It's a common misperception that registering a trademark with the federal government is how one gets trademark rights.  In the US, trademark rights are developed by use, not by registration.  Registration strengthens those rights and makes them easier to enforce. So the fact that they haven't got their mark registered yet doesn't mean they don't have rights. 

On the other hand, it doesn't mean they do nor, if they do, that they have the right to stop your use.

The issue for trademark infringement is "likelihood of confusion".  You say that their site is very different from yours.  For a trademark analysis, you need to look at it from a consumer-of-services point of view, which may lead to the same conclusion you reached, but possibly not.  If the subject matter of your blog and their goods or services would be considered in the same "channels of trade" (or appealing to similar groups) then similar names might cause confusion.  Which means you have to look at the names.  (And note that having an extra word or syllable won't necessarily make your name not "similar" to theirs.)

The fact that your "xyz" is descriptive of what you write about is important.  While this means that your own trademark rights in the name could be weak, it also means -- at least as far as trademark law is concerned -- there could be a strong argument that you should be allowed to use the name. 

As a matter of public policy, we don't want the law to keep people from being able to communicate about their goods or services, so there are some limits to what sorts of names can be protected as trademarks.  Generic names are absolutely not protectable as trademarks -- if they are applied to the thing they are.  (I cannot have "Apple" brand apples, but can have "Apple" brand computers.)  Descriptive names can be protected, but they have to be used long enough to develop what is called "secondary meaning"--namely, the mark has to be used long enough for the consuming public to recognize that that particular description of the product or service is used by one particular company. 

As I mentioned, there are some peculiar wrinkles for domain names.  As I understand it--and I may be wrong--in the absence of trademark infringement, a company must have a famous mark to begin with if they are to force out another domain name, and for that the standard is a somewhat tweaked version of  "likelihood of confusion" having to do with whether people will hit the "infringing" site instead of the famous one.   

It sounds like this company is playing an intimidation game with you -- particularly since they tried to buy you out a couple of times first.  This makes it sound like they don't have much of a leg to stand on.  (Although, perhaps they have sufficient rights and just didn't realize it then... not likely, but possible.)

If you are serious about holding onto your domain name, and it sounds like you are, it would be good for you to consult trademark counsel with whom you could lay out the details.  This could be a Canadian attorney who knows US trademark law or an American trademark attorney. 

To minimize the cost of consulting counsel, however, you'll want to inform yourself as much as possible ahead of time.  The US PTO website has some information.  There are also a number of US IP law firms that have online articles about trademark and domain name infringement.  Past threads here, too, may be helpful.  The more you understand what evidence will help you, the more you can dig up yourself to show to the attorney.  Gather evidence of such things as your first date of use, the other guys' claimed first use (in their trademark application available on line), how you use your site, how they use theirs and what their products or services are, their prior correspondence with you, etc.  Having such proofs in front of him or her, counsel will be better able to give you a judgment as to where you probably stand and what they can do for you.  You may only need a strongly worded letter from counsel to get these guys off your back.  But if the practicalities of fighting it look too expensive, you'll want to know that, too.

Good luck!

PS  Don't be shy about asking attorneys about their billing practices up front.  Check with several and compare.  Also ask about whether they've handled similar situations individual clients like yourself, and how those turned out.
« Last Edit: 07-26-09 at 11:19 am by Kaitlin »
Logged
This post is an off-the-cuff musing and should not be misconstrued as legal advice. THERE IS NO ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN US. Proper legal advice requires full disclosure of facts-not appropriate to a public forum-and attorney research time and effort which has not been expended here.

A blogging Mommy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: C & D letter from a trademark that is not yet approved
« Reply #2 on: 07-26-09 at 03:22 pm »

Thank you so so much for your detailed response!

And I do understand what you are saying about a trademark name, unfortunately, their name is just words, and is not something that is unique to them like "Facebook" or "Apple Computers".  Could someone trademark their name to be something like "I don't think so?" and just have a link farm?!? - I don't think so!  Meanwhile, at my blog I write about that I do not think!  (Just an example, no where near the real names of the websites).

Although our names are similar, when people end up on my site by searching their name, the average amount of time spent on my site is only 14 seconds - on average it is less than 1 person a day.  Meanwhile, my readers spend an average of over 4 minutes a day.  So, I am not sure if the 2 products are so similar that they could confuse, but the readers sure seem to know the difference.

Thanks again, and yes, I have done a tremendous amount of background work on their site vs. mine.  One interesting thing that I discovered is that in all their meta tags related to their site, they are all valid things that their website is about.  Meanwhile with the trademark they are applying for, the key operations are a very FAR leap from what they are offering and could also be a far leap for what services my website offers.  This is the only place that I have ever seen those words describing their site - in fact, they are a not at all what they are offering.  I'm not sure what the word would be for this, but it's far worse than sneaky -it's darn right deceitful and devious.

I will be contacting a lawyer and I hope in this small little place I live, I will be able to find a person that has dealt with this type of situation before.  I have checked out the other domain name forum, and I do not fall under those 3 criteria

Anymore discussion would be greatly appreciated!
Logged

Kaitlin

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 740
    • View Profile
Re: C & D letter from a trademark that is not yet approved
« Reply #3 on: 07-26-09 at 03:51 pm »

Your welcome!  Hope it helped somewhat.

Could someone trademark their name to be something like "I don't think so?" and just have a link farm?!? - I don't think so!  [....] Meanwhile with the trademark they are applying for, the key operations are a very FAR leap from what they are offering and could also be a far leap for what services my website offers.
Actually, the less a trademark name has to do with what's being offered, the stronger it is oftentimes.  So the fact that their goods or services don't relate to what they sell or do could be a good thing for them, from a trademark perspective.

BUT, the exception to that general rule is if the name is misdescriptive, that is if the mark is calculated to mislead customers into thinking they are describing their product/service when they are not.  (I could use "Diamond" as a strong brand name for nuts, e.g., but not for anything that had anything to do with jewelry, since people might be misled into thinking I'm selling a real "diamond" bracelet, etc. instead of just using "Diamond" as a brand.)  Trademark law frowns upon fraud.

I'm not that familiar with link farms, but if these people have chosen the name not as an arbitrary set of words to use just as a trademark, but rather to deliberately mislead people into going to their site in order to link them to other places and generate revenue this way...then that sounds closer to misdescriptive than to arbitrary to me.   

Maybe after the weekend you'll get some more internet-savvy responses that can speak more directly to your situation.
Logged
This post is an off-the-cuff musing and should not be misconstrued as legal advice. THERE IS NO ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN US. Proper legal advice requires full disclosure of facts-not appropriate to a public forum-and attorney research time and effort which has not been expended here.

A blogging Mommy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: C & D letter from a trademark that is not yet approved
« Reply #4 on: 07-26-09 at 03:59 pm »

Thanks again! 

And a link farm is just a website that has a whole bunch of links to all different websites.  In fact they are cybersquatting because their top  search hits are not their name at all or anything close to it.  People have searched popular stores and end up on their website instead - I would call that cybersquatting!  I guess these are all just things that will help support my case - I hope!

Take care,

A blogging Mommy
Logged

JSonnabend

  • Forum Moderator
  • Lead Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3703
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: C & D letter from a trademark that is not yet approved
« Reply #5 on: 07-27-09 at 07:53 am »

Ok, truth be told, I didn't read Kaitlin's posts.  My eyes glazed over at their length.  Apologies in advance if I repeat anything she's said, therefore.

Long story short is this.  Trademark rights are essentially first in time, first in right.  If you were using your domain name (assuming your use even qualifies as a TM use), before the other party began its use, you are likely in a superior position.

Second, even if your use doesn't appear to predate the other party's use, you may still be ok if either (1) your use isn't a TM use, or (2) there is no substantial likelihood of confusion between your use and the other party's mark.

I wouldn't be intimidated by the C&D letter per se, but I wouldn't ignore it either.

I'd be happy to go over details with you in a preliminary consultation if you want to give me a shout.  I should be able to steer you in the right direction.

- Jeff
Logged
SonnabendLaw
Intellectual Property and Technology Law
Brooklyn, USA
718-832-8810
JSonnabend@SonnabendLaw.com

A blogging Mommy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: C & D letter from a trademark that is not yet approved
« Reply #6 on: 07-30-09 at 10:13 am »

Thanks for all your answers!

I am in contact with a lawyer and will let you all know what happens.



Logged

A blogging Mommy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: C & D letter from a trademark that is not yet approved
« Reply #7 on: 08-04-09 at 03:30 pm »

Hi There,

Here is an update to what has happened.  Last week I got a call from the cyberbullies lawyer saying they would like to buy my site for X amount of dollars.  I said I wanted until Monday to think about it and I would call them back on Monday.

I have called and called and sent emails, and they are ignoring me.  Do you think they are just waiting for the C & D letter to expire?  So they can take me to the next level?

If I do sign the C & D is it saying that I agree that I was cybersquatting?  Or just agreeing to hand over the site?

Thanks,

A Blogging Mommy
Logged

JSonnabend

  • Forum Moderator
  • Lead Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3703
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: C & D letter from a trademark that is not yet approved
« Reply #8 on: 08-05-09 at 06:34 am »

C&D letters don't "expire" in any legal sense.  They have no force of law, they're merely warnings and/or demands.

There could be many reasons why they have not responded to you, anything from vacations, to dealing with more important (to them) matters, and a client who hasn't paid his attorney.

Unless you plan on rolling over, your best bet is (and has been all along) talking to a lawyer of your own, not handling this yourself.

- Jeff
Logged
SonnabendLaw
Intellectual Property and Technology Law
Brooklyn, USA
718-832-8810
JSonnabend@SonnabendLaw.com
 



Footer

www.intelproplaw.com

Terms of Use
Feel free to contact us:
Sorry, spam is killing us.

iKnight Technologies Inc.

www.intelproplaw.com

Page created in 0.149 seconds with 22 queries.