Strategies for IP Protection in Online Platforms mike rodenbaugh

1. Strategies for IP Protectionin Online Platformsmike rodenbaugh American Conference Institute E-Summit April 24, 2008

2. Keywords and Domain Names • Keyword/trademark advertising • "use" of a third party's trademark in commerce? • how and when to stop others from bidding • Different search engines -- different policies • Domain name tasting; PPC cybersquatting • Phishing on the rise • Confronting infringers • Policy Development?

3. Native v. PPC results

6. Pay-per-click Ads = UGC? • Advertisers choose ad text and keywords • With some help from search engine ad providers • Keyword generators , editing, review • Terms of Service, of course, make advertiser responsible for content and keywords • PPC domain registered by owner • Content (context) provided by domain owner • Ad feed provided by Google or Yahoo! • Advertisers can opt out of specific domains, or from domain parking channel

7. Keyword Bidding = TM “Use”? • 2d Circuit courts say NO – claim dismissed • Buyers: Merck, Hamzik, FragranceNet • Platform: Rescuecom v. Google (on appeal) • Other Circuit courts say YES – claim continues • Buyers: Edina Realty, Buying for the Home, JG Wentworth • Platforms: Geico, American Blinds, JR Cigar

8. Keyword Bidding -- Europe • France – Google liable for TM infringement for suggesting TMs as relevant keywords in relation to generic terms • Germany – Google did not make TM use • Italy – neither Google nor advertiser made TM use • Netherlands – advertiser did not infringe • UK – Yahoo! did not infringe by “broad match” of ads competitive to Mr. Spicy, for ‘spicy’ queries; and did not make TM use

9. Trademark Policy • TM keyword bid only permitted in “Sponsored Search” if: • Nominative fair use -- resellers • Descriptive use -- information site AND not selling or promoting competitive goods • Will not address TM complaints in native search results

10. TM Policy - AdWords • Two choices: Specific complaint, or general • Specific complaint vs. specific URLs • general complaint vs. all ads, identify any authorized users • US, Canada, UK/IE • will not disable keywords in response to TM complaint, but will remove TM from ad text • Rest of World • will disable TM as keyword and remove from ad text • Either way, also will prevent from future use

11. Trademarks As Keywords

12. TM Policy -- AdSense • encourage TM owners to resolve disputes directly with registrants or registrars(!) • “As a courtesy to trademark owners, however, we are willing to perform a limited investigation of reasonable complaints.” • Google also allows advertisers to opt out of domain channel

13. Domain Name “Tasting” • Register and “taste” name for 5 days • Measure traffic & revenue via PPC ads • Return 98% of domains for full refund • Keep and pay for profitable domain names • Monetize domain names via PPC ads, popups, redirection • Get paid by Google or Yahoo! • Wait for C&D, UDRP or ACPA complaint TM Office Comes to CA. - 2008

15. Domain Name Kiting • Repetitive Tasting • Registrars and registrants taste (monetize) domain names in bulk and delete them • Then, using an automated process, they automatically re-register them... again and again. • Often through affiliated entities, in effort to evade detection TM Office Comes to CA. - 2008

17. ISP Use of Non-registered Domains TM Office Comes to CA. - 2008

18. Domain Name Remedies • Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) • Arbitration procedure mandated by ICANN via domain name registration agreement • Rapid Time Scale – No Monetary Damages • Anti-cybersquatter Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) – 15 USC 1125(d) • in personam • in rem TM Office Comes to CA. - 2008

19. Recent UDRP Cases of Note • Reseller makes bona fide offering and thus legitimate use? • NASCARtours.com – Respondent prevails because he offers ‘only tours of NASCAR events’ and provides prominent disclaimer • GE-Merlin.com – Complainant prevails because of likely initial interest confusion, despite sale only of Merlins, and prominent disclaimers TM Office Comes to CA. - 2008

20. Source: Verisign’s .com registry report, Apr. 2007

21. ACPA Cases of Note • Vulcan Golf et al. vs. Google et al. (USDC N.D. IL,; Case No. 07-Civ-3371) • Class action against registrants, parking companies, and advertisers • Motion to dismiss denied in part (RICO and some state claims dismissed; federal TM claims remain) • Dell and Yahoo! et al v. BelgiumDomains et al. (USDC S.D. FL; Case No. 07-Civ-22674) • Civil case for cybersquatting, counterfeiting, TM infringement • Federal seizure raid conducted with US Marshals • Pre-judgment asset freeze (+1 million domain names and millions of dollars)

22. Phishing Attacks Multiply • Number of incidents and of targeted brands continues to rise • Sophistication and efficiency of attacks continues to rise – esp. “fast flux” abuses • Social networks frequently targeted, enabling spear phishing • Phone phishing now common • IDNs becoming more widespread

23. IDNs and new TLDs are coming! • العربية简体中文繁體中文Ελληνικάहिन्दी日本語한국어فارسیРусскийייִדישதமிழ் • .web, .blog, .sex … anywhere from 100 to 60 million other new TLD extensions

24. IP Rights Protection Mechanisms • Cybersquatting and Phishing is too quick and easy, and remedies are too expensive and slow • Policy Development is needed to fix this • Potential options: • Standardized Sunrise Registration Process • Faster and cheaper pre-UDRP process, with rapid DNS suspension upon default • Rapid DNS suspension upon evidence of phishing or malware (to be tested in dotAsia?)

25. Questions?