The ongoing conflict between content-industry groups and “open Internet” proponents has been heating up recently in a battle over Internet sites that allegedly allow users to access pirated or counterfeit content. Since last summer, the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division has been running a campaign it calls “Operation: In Our Sites” to seize domain names used in alleged criminal copyright infringement activities.… More
Monthly Archives: May 2011
More Thoughts on the “Trademark Bully” Report: The Department of Commerce did a Good Job with a Bad Assignment
I am attending the INTA Annual Meeting in San Francisco, and a number of people are talking about the “trademark bully” report released a few weeks ago by the Department of Commerce. During these conversations, it became clear that a few people misconstrued some comments that I made to the press and in my prior blog post . I would like to clarify my views.
While I am not in favor of devoting scarce government resources to address the so-called trademark bullies issue, I have no problem with how the Department of Commerce conducted the study. In fact, I think the Department of Commerce did a good job carrying out the directive of Congress…
After a lengthy and contentious approval process, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) recently entered into an agreement with ICM Registry to delegate the new .xxx top-level domain (TLD). The .xxx domain, intended to serve as an Internet "red light district" (despite being strongly opposed by many in the adult entertainment community itself), will likely go live later this year. In the meantime,… More
The long-awaited study of so-called trademark bullies was recently released by the Department of Commerce. As you may recall from our prior blog post, the study was the result of legislation filed by Senator Leahy of Vermont and signed into law by President Obama on March 17, 2010 (Pub. L. 111-146, Sec. 4). The legislation gave the Secretary of Commerce one year to “study and report to [Congress] the extent to which small businesses may be harmed by litigation tactics [by corporations] [the purpose of which is] attempting to enforce trademark rights beyond a reasonable interpretation of the scope of the rights granted to the trademark owner.” (Subsequent to enactment, the words “of corporations” were stricken and replaced by “the purpose of which is” by Pub.L. 111-295, Sec. 6(h).)
It is common for contracts that grant intellectual property licenses or that include confidentiality obligations to include a provision in which the licensee or the user of confidential information acknowledges that breach of its confidentiality or license obligations will cause irreparable harm and that the other party will be entitled to injunctive relief to enforce any breach or threatened breach of the provision. Many an attorney has spent time negotiating the finer points of such acknowledgment provisions.… More