Corporations have started to test their ability to use the courts to dismantle gripe sites which disparage them. In some instances, they attack the use of the domain name which may include the corporations trademark. In other instances, they attack the use of the companies name in the text of of the web pages. Trademark violation and cybersquatting allegations are the favorite legal theories used by lawyers attempting to shut down so-called gripe sites.
Kevin J. Heller, esq, has an interesting post [Gripe Sites Pit Trademark Rights versus Free Speech] concerning the state of gripe site litigation nationally. He refers to a USA Today article which identifies some of the current cases pending nationally and then provides a synopsis of some of the precedent (much of it inconsistent) in this growing area of law which often pits the first amendment right to free speech against defamation and trademark law.
Here are some examples of what is happening on the ground:
Domain arbitrator WIPO, meeting in Spain, has decided that Microsoft
is not entitled to the domain "mocosoft.com" despite the fact that some
of the same letters appear in both company's names. The site hosts a
long list of downloadable applications.
The decision comes on
the back off a year-long crusade by Microsoft to take ownership of all
and any domains that even sound like its own name.
Story: The Register
........................
Trademark Lawsuit and On-Line Gripping: Scores of disgruntled
customers who criticize businesses on Internet "gripe sites" are
finding themselves entangled in costly court battles with companies
charging trademark infringement.
But the courts aren't buying
the trademark argument, and have consistently upheld the free speech
rights of people who vent about companies on the Internet. Article by
Tresa Baldas, The National Law Journal, at Law.com
I totally agree. But Zach gives a really interesting take on it in the Domain Book. I definately recommend it for more info.
Posted by: Jim | 2008.04.16 at 04:19 PM