Some companies take laxed view of cybersquatted domains, including typosquatters who are in clear violation of the UDRP and ACPA. To often, a trademark holder analyzes the matter purely in terms of traffic. They assume, wrongly in some instances, that a typosquatted domain isn’t generating much traffic anyway. They may not understand direct navigation or fail to employ the analytic tools available in order to measure traffic being diverted from their trademark protected websites.
The Anticybersquatting Piracy Act is part of the Federal Lanham Act, designed specifically to protect domain names as trademarks. Trademark right owners have tremendous leverage against cybersquatters if they monitor the internet and enforce their rights as appropriate. Sometimes, a trademark lawyer is not enough. You need an attorney who specializes in cybersquatting and internet law issues.
The primary issue which a trademark holder should focus on in determining whether and how to deal with cybersquatters has nothing to do with lost traffic, lost business and lost revenue. The most important reason why every company should be concerned about cybersquatting activity on their domains is that they’d be weakening or diluting their trademark rights by allowing such infringing domains to exist. One of the first things that any UDRP Respondent or Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act Defendant will do is note all of the other infringing uses of the trademark, including typosquatters and other cybersquatters on the trademark itself. In extreme examples, a trademark holder can waive their trademark rights altogether if they do not preclude other unlicensed uses.
This is not to say that every typo or cybersquatter must be quashed. If a trademark holder shows diligent efforts to protect its marks in commerce, this will typically be enough to satisfy the judge even if infringing uses remain. In deciding which cyber and typosquatters to go after, we recommend that potential traffic on those domains be measured with analytic technology and that blocks of domains being held by a single registrant be secured in a single UDRP proceeding or infringement threat letter.
Too many companies view cyber and typosquatters as a nuisance which warrant little attention. We live in a world where trademark rights and intangible property continue to increase in value, adding real dollars to a company's bottom-line. Companies need to understand that they must protect their trademark rights in order to capitalize on this potential value. Typosquatters and cybersquatters pose a real threat to trademark value.