Host A Website And Get Sued For Trademark Infringement - Maybe In California

According to the Department of Commerce, lossesto the alleged infringer.
to U.S. businesses from the counterfeiting ofCease and desist letters sent under California's
trademarked consumer products are estimated atproposed new trademark law appear somewhat
$200 billion a year. A model trademark law proposedrelated in function to the "takedown notices" under
by the International Trademark Association andthe Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The takedown
currently winding its way through the legislativeprovisions of the DMCA essentially compels an
process in California includes a provision whichinternet service provider to disable access to material
appears to be an attempt to slow this ever growingallegedly infringing the complainant's copyright or
enterprise.otherwise face the loss of immunity from claims of
The proposed new trademark law provides that thecontributory infringement. Similarly, under the
owner of a state registered mark may bring anproposed trademark law, an ISP who receives a
action for infringement against any persons thatcease and desist demand could face a trademark
"knowingly facilitate, enable, or otherwise assist ainfringement claim if it continues to provide access
person to manufacture, use, distribute, display, or sellfor the infringer or otherwise continues to facilitate
any goods or services bearing any reproduction,the infringing activity.
counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of a markWhat about if the alleged infringer is not engaged in
registered under this chapter, without the consent ofany infringing activity, or the complaining party is
the registrant." Under the new trademark law, acompelled by a desire to hobble its competition?
person is presumed to have acted knowingly if thatUnder the DMCA, the alleged infringer may send the
person continues to engage in the complained ofISP a counter notice claiming non-infringement. If the
activity following delivery and receipt of a cease andISP receives a proper counter notice the ISP is
desist demand letter containing certain language andprevented from disabling access to the complained of
information.material and maintains its immunity from contributory
In the case of brick and mortar commerce, thisinfringement. However, under the proposed
provision appears to be entirely reasonable. If atrademark law if the alleged infringer insists that it is
landlord leasing retail space to a business receives anot engaged in any infringing activity the ISP is stuck
cease and desist letter from a mark owner, thebetween the proverbial rock and a hard place; the
landlord has the ability to visit the property andISP is left to decide what it must do. If the ISP
investigate the claim. Likewise, a swap meet operatorbelieves the alleged infringer, who may also be the
receiving such a cease and desist letter canISP's customer, but later turns out to be wrong, the
investigate the claim and, presumably after personallyISP could face infringement liability. If the ISP
inspecting the complained of goods, would have theterminates service to its customer and it is later
ability to determine whether the goods are infringingdetermined that its customer was not engaging in
or legitimate. Given the ability to reasonablyany infringing activity, the ISP could possibly face a
investigate any such infringement claims, it isbreach of contract claim. Even if the ISP has
reasonable that persons akin to landlords and swaplanguage in its contract which allows it to terminate
meet operators bear some responsibility forthe customer's contract, firing a customer is not
merchandise sold on their premises. However, thegood for business.
question being posed now by Internet activists suchGiven the prospect of litigation or the fallout from
as the Electronic Frontier Foundation is how such afiring a customer, ISPs and other service providers
provision will play out in cyberspace.would rather terminate a contract then face litigation.
While companies such as Google, Yahoo and eBayAn unscrupulous brand owner could take advantage
have a large enough legal department to handle theof this by sending cease and desist letters to end
predicted onslaught of cease and desist letters,truthful but unfavorable comparative advertising or
smaller providers would be hard pressed to deal withother non-infringing uses of its marks. Unless the
the receipt a significant number of cease and desistCalifornia legislature further amends its proposed
letters in a cost efficient manner. Rather than facetrademark law to address the untenable position ISPs
litigation and any possible adverse judgment, its likelyand service providers would be placed in, brand
that a smaller provider would rather terminate serviceowner bullying is certain to occur.