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

Yes, there are several defenses to an Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) claim. In North Carolina, the most common defense is that of fair use. This involves using a domain name that is similar to an existing trademark but is not likely to cause confusion. In some cases, the domain name may be used with an intention to criticize or comment on the trademark holder. There is also a defense of legitimate noncommercial or fair use, which involves using the domain name in a way that is not commercial in nature. Another defense is the use of an expired domain name. If the domain name had been registered and used legitimately in the past, then it may be a legitimate defense to an ACPA claim. Additionally, trademarks can be challenged on the basis of prior use. If a domain name was used before the trademark was registered, then this may be a valid defense to an ACPA claim. Finally, a defense that is often used in North Carolina is the use of a domain name for a "gripe site," which involves using the trademarked domain name in protest or criticism of the trademark holder.

Related FAQs

What is an unfair competition trial like?
What are the elements of a false advertising claim?
What is the difference between unfair competition and trademark infringement?
How does the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulate unfair competition?
What remedies are available for a violation of unfair competition law?
Are there any special rules for protecting trade secrets?
What are the remedies available for a violation of a trade dress infringement claim?
What is the doctrine of patent exhaustion?
Are there any defenses to a tortious interference with contractual relations claim?
What is the concept of “likelihood of confusion”?

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

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts