At 07:42 PM 2/2/99 -0800, you wrote:
>At 09:13 PM 2/2/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>
>And don't forget that even a word within the address may not infringe:
>the domain name "epix.com" was ruled not to infringe the registered
>trademark of Epix, Inc. The District Court decision, now on appeal
>in the Ninth Circuit, can be read at:
>http://www.bna.com/e-law/cases/epix.html
>
>I was lead attorney for the plaintiff-counterclaim defendants. I am
>told that this is the first case which actually says that one must
>follow trademark law in terms of likelihood of confusion before
>deciding on an infringement claim against a domain name holder
Actually, when this came back I noticed I got to typing too fast
and have to qualify that last. I'm told that this was the first case
in which a domain name holder got a 30 day letter from NSI and so
took up the cudgel against the complaining trademark owner with
a suit for Declaratory Judgment and won.
Bill Lovell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://cerebalaw.com
