|
Since I had no desire to be in violation of any laws, I conducted a
little research on both
trademark law and the
Anti-Cybersquatting Act, and I
could not see how I had violated either of them. Recognizing that, as a non-lawyer, my understanding
of either or both of these laws could well be flawed, I decided to ask Ms. Greenberg to tell me
exactly what sections of those laws she thought I was violating. Here's the text of my letter of May
24, 2001.
|
Dear Ms. Greenberg:
This is in response to your letter of May 17 (TCI-04380/03).
I'm puzzled by the operative paragraph:
"You are hereby advised that this use of our client's registered mark creates a likelihood of
confusion as to a relationship with our client, in violation of federal and state trademark and
unfair competition law, as well as a violation of the federal Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection
Act."
As it says on the website in question, I created the site as a public service. I live near the
mall, and was very excited when the development was announced. I'm a big fan of what your client is
doing. Although I have not been able to devote the time to the site that I had hoped, I'd like to
evolve it into a sophisticated site containing a great deal of information about the mall, including
interactive maps and, perhaps, videos and/or VR tours.
Nothing about my site does (or will ever) detract from your client's business. In fact, by
offering additional information about the mall, I can only heighten awareness in your client's
property and, hopefully, increase their business. I would think that your client would want to
encourage my endeavor, and I'm puzzled as to why they're trying to shut me down instead. Perhaps
they just don't understand what I'm doing with the site - and if that's the case, I'm hopeful that
this note may help to clear up the confusion.
To address your specific concerns:
I agree that it would be a problem if anything about my site confused people into thinking
that I had any kind of relationship with your client. With that in mind, the home page of my site
features (and has always featured) a prominent statement that my site is "unofficial." Even better,
the home page of my site features (and has always featured) a link to your client's site. (Again,
I'm bringing business to them, not taking business from them.) I feel that those features eliminate
any possibility that anyone might be confused into thinking that I have a relationship with your
client. However, if you feel that other wording would serve to make that point more clear, I would
appreciate any suggestion that you might have.
As a trademark holder myself, I am certainly sensitive to issues of trademark infringement,
and would never intentionally do so. Not being an attorney, I am forced to rely on consumer
publications for my information about trademark law, so please forgive me if this seems laughably
over-simplistic to you, but...
I am clearly not trying to "palm off" my efforts as being those of your client.
As I stated earlier, I don't believe that there is any likelihood of consumer confusion
(and if you disagree, I am open to suggestion as to how the confusion might be eliminated).
I am not competing with your client - in fact, my website is engaged in no commercial
activity whatsoever. Although I understand that you may be skeptical that I created the site as a
public service, I do have a habit of doing things like that, and you can see many of those efforts
via links from my WebFeats.com home page (D/FW ISP's, Addison Restaurant Guide, Webserver Setup
Diary, etc.).
I had never heard of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, but I looked it up
online - and once again, as with trademark issues, I don't see how my site runs afoul of that act.
(Again, I'm not a lawyer, I recognize that I may be overlooking something that's obvious to you.)
Specifically...
I have no bad-faith (or any other) intent to profit from your client's trademark.
I am using the domain name non-commercially.
I am not attempting to divert consumers from your client's website. (In fact, I am doing
the exact opposite.)
I am not attempting to sell the domain name for financial gain. (The domain name is not for
sale.)
I did not provide any false or misleading information in the process of registering the
domain name.
Ms. Greenberg, if you still believe that my website causes trademark infringements or
"cybersquatting" violations, I'd be grateful if you could steer me to the relevant sections of the
laws that you believe I'm violating. Since I have no desire to break any laws, I will surrender the
domain name as soon as you convince me that I'm doing so, which could save both of us a lot of
unnecessary work, time, and trouble.
Please let me know if you have any questions about this or if there is any other information I
could provide that might help to clarify the situation and/or my intentions.
Hank Mishkoff
|
|
