Are there any defenses to an Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act claim?

Yes, there are several defenses available to those accused of violating the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) in Massachusetts. The primary defense is that the accused did not act with the “bad faith intent to profit” from another’s trademark. In other words, if the accused purchased and maintained the domain name for a legitimate purpose, then they may be able to defend themselves. Another defense is that the domain name in question does not actually identify a business by name, distinguishing it from the trademark in question. For example, a domain name of “businessname.org” would likely be considered in violation of the ACPA, but the name “petlovers.org” would not. The accused may also be able to demonstrate that the domain name was in use prior to the registration of the trademark. This would mean that the domain name was not registered with the intent to trade on the goodwill of the trademark. Finally, the accused may be able to argue that they did not know of or had reason to know of the trademark’s existence before registering the domain name. This defense may be difficult to prove, however, since registering a domain name typically requires researching other potential domain names to ensure one’s chosen name does not infringe on existing trademarks.

Related FAQs

Are there any special rules for unfair competition related to the internet?
What are the elements of an unlawful act of unfair competition?
Are there any defenses against a UDRP claim?
What is false advertising?
What are the legally recognized types of unfair competition?
What is the doctrine of unjust enrichment?
What is the difference between unfair competition and trademark infringement?
What is the doctrine of primary jurisdiction?
Are there any special rules for protecting trade secrets?
What is the Sherman-Kleptomania Doctrine?

Are there any defenses to an Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act claim?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts