The Virtual Lawyer

Plaintiff Interactive Products Corp. (IPC) manufactures and sells a portable computer stand called the Lap Traveler, which is a registered trademark of IPC. Defendant a2z sells the Lap Traveler on its Web site at: a2zsolutions.com/ desks/floor/laptraveler/dkfl-lt.htm.

In 1998 the partners who formed IPC split up. The defecting partner, Douglas Mayer, agreed that the remaining partner, Mark Comeaux, would retain the exclusive right to use the “Lap Traveler” name.

Mayer subsequently formed a new company, Mobile Office Enterprise, Inc. (MOE), which soon developed a portable computer stand called the Mobile Desk.

Around the same time, IPC told a2z to stop selling Lap Travelers. A2z complied and began selling Mobile Desks instead, but at the same URL (a2zsolutions.com/desks/floor/laptraveler/dkfl-lt.htm).

Shortly thereafter, IPC's Comeaux realized that Internet searches of the word “Lap Traveler” consistently listed a2z's Mobile-Desk-selling page as one of the results. IPC then brought suit against a2z for, among other things, “a2z's use of the term 'laptraveler' in the post-domain path of the URL for a2z's portable-computer-stand Web page.”

Citing the legal standard, the Court framed the issue around IPC's burden of proving that its trademark embedded in the post-domain path of a2z's portable-computer-stand Web page was likely to cause confusion to customers.

“[T]he issue is whether a consumer is likely to notice 'laptraveler' in the post-domain path and then think that the Mobile Desk may be produced by the same company (or a company affiliated with the company) that makes the Lap Traveler,” the court reasoned. “Previously, courts have ruled that 'the use of another's trademark in one's Web site domain name violates trademark law.' But these courts have all relied on the fact that domain names usually signify source. … The post-domain path of a URL, however, does not typically signify source. The post-domain path merely shows how the Web site's data is organized within the host computer's files.”

The court went on to find that Web pages containing post-domain paths are not reached by entering the full URL into a browser; instead, these secondary pages are usually reached via a link from the Web site's homepage, which does not contain a post-domain path. For example, a consumer wanting to purchase a Lap Traveler product would probably not enter “a2zsolutions.com/desks/floor/laptraveler/dkfl-lt.htm” into a browser. The consumer would more likely enter “LapTraveler.com,” which would bring the consumer to IPC's Web site, which sells the Lap Traveler.

Distinguishing the litany of contrary decisions as hinging on source infringement, the court ruled that “[b]ecause post-domain paths do not typically signify source, it is unlikely that the presence of another's trademark in a post-domain path of a URL would ever violate trademark law. For purposes of the present case, however, it is enough to find that IPC has not presented any evidence that the presence of 'laptraveler' in the post-domain path of a2z's portable-computer-stand Web page is likely to cause consumer confusion regarding the source of the web page or the source of the Mobile Desk product, which is offered for sale on the Web page.”

The EasyInternet CafZ, Napster-esque brainchild of Greek entrepreneur Stelios Haji-Ioannou, recently agreed to pay the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) $326,700 in damages and fees to settle a 21-month-old lawsuit.

In January, a British High Court judge found EasyInternet Cafe guilty of copyright infringement for allowing customers to download protected music from the Internet.

After the verdict, Haji-Iannou, founder of the low-cost airline EasyJet Plc, vowed that he would appeal the decision.

The two sides worked out a settlement, however, with EasyInternet agreeing to pay $125,000 in damages plus the BPI's legal fees, bringing the total to $326,700.

“I am glad that Stelios has seen sense and agreed to settle this case,” says Peter Jamieson, executive chairman of BPI, which counts major music labels Sony Music, EMI and Universal Music, among others, as its members.

The controversial Web site suspended its commercial service in September 2001, citing commercial reasons. In court EasyIntenet argued that it should not be held liable for customers downloading copyright-protected materials, a defense rejected by Justice Peter Smith. This case is yet another battle in the music industry's war against illicit CD-copying and Internet downloading, seen as the two activities most culpable for declining sales.

According to Jay Berman, chair of the International Federation of Phonographic Industry, global music sales fell 7.2% to $32.2 billion last year. He expects CD sales to fall a further 5% in 2003.

Wire reports contributed to this article.

Post-Domain Path Not a Trademark Problem, Sixth Circuit Opines

In the case of Interactive Products Corp. v. a2z Mobile Office Solutions, Inc., No. 01-3590 (6th Cir, 4/10/03), the Sixth Circuit has ruled that the use of a registered trademark in the post-domain path of a URL does not violate trademark law because it is unlikely to create customer confusion regarding the origins of the goods offered at the Web site.

The post-domain path of a URL is everything after the domain name, such as any verbiage that appears after “nytimes.com” or “yahoo.com.”

Plaintiff Interactive Products Corp. (IPC) manufactures and sells a portable computer stand called the Lap Traveler, which is a registered trademark of IPC. Defendant a2z sells the Lap Traveler on its Web site at: a2zsolutions.com/ desks/floor/laptraveler/dkfl-lt.htm.

In 1998 the partners who formed IPC split up. The defecting partner, Douglas Mayer, agreed that the remaining partner, Mark Comeaux, would retain the exclusive right to use the “Lap Traveler” name.

Mayer subsequently formed a new company, Mobile Office Enterprise, Inc. (MOE), which soon developed a portable computer stand called the Mobile Desk.

Around the same time, IPC told a2z to stop selling Lap Travelers. A2z complied and began selling Mobile Desks instead, but at the same URL (a2zsolutions.com/desks/floor/laptraveler/dkfl-lt.htm).

Shortly thereafter, IPC's Comeaux realized that Internet searches of the word “Lap Traveler” consistently listed a2z's Mobile-Desk-selling page as one of the results. IPC then brought suit against a2z for, among other things, “a2z's use of the term 'laptraveler' in the post-domain path of the URL for a2z's portable-computer-stand Web page.”

Citing the legal standard, the Court framed the issue around IPC's burden of proving that its trademark embedded in the post-domain path of a2z's portable-computer-stand Web page was likely to cause confusion to customers.

“[T]he issue is whether a consumer is likely to notice 'laptraveler' in the post-domain path and then think that the Mobile Desk may be produced by the same company (or a company affiliated with the company) that makes the Lap Traveler,” the court reasoned. “Previously, courts have ruled that 'the use of another's trademark in one's Web site domain name violates trademark law.' But these courts have all relied on the fact that domain names usually signify source. … The post-domain path of a URL, however, does not typically signify source. The post-domain path merely shows how the Web site's data is organized within the host computer's files.”

The court went on to find that Web pages containing post-domain paths are not reached by entering the full URL into a browser; instead, these secondary pages are usually reached via a link from the Web site's homepage, which does not contain a post-domain path. For example, a consumer wanting to purchase a Lap Traveler product would probably not enter “a2zsolutions.com/desks/floor/laptraveler/dkfl-lt.htm” into a browser. The consumer would more likely enter “LapTraveler.com,” which would bring the consumer to IPC's Web site, which sells the Lap Traveler.

Distinguishing the litany of contrary decisions as hinging on source infringement, the court ruled that “[b]ecause post-domain paths do not typically signify source, it is unlikely that the presence of another's trademark in a post-domain path of a URL would ever violate trademark law. For purposes of the present case, however, it is enough to find that IPC has not presented any evidence that the presence of 'laptraveler' in the post-domain path of a2z's portable-computer-stand Web page is likely to cause consumer confusion regarding the source of the web page or the source of the Mobile Desk product, which is offered for sale on the Web page.”

The EasyInternet CafZ, Napster-esque brainchild of Greek entrepreneur Stelios Haji-Ioannou, recently agreed to pay the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) $326,700 in damages and fees to settle a 21-month-old lawsuit.

In January, a British High Court judge found EasyInternet Cafe guilty of copyright infringement for allowing customers to download protected music from the Internet.

After the verdict, Haji-Iannou, founder of the low-cost airline EasyJet Plc, vowed that he would appeal the decision.

The two sides worked out a settlement, however, with EasyInternet agreeing to pay $125,000 in damages plus the BPI's legal fees, bringing the total to $326,700.

“I am glad that Stelios has seen sense and agreed to settle this case,” says Peter Jamieson, executive chairman of BPI, which counts major music labels Sony Music, EMI and Universal Music, among others, as its members.

The controversial Web site suspended its commercial service in September 2001, citing commercial reasons. In court EasyIntenet argued that it should not be held liable for customers downloading copyright-protected materials, a defense rejected by Justice Peter Smith. This case is yet another battle in the music industry's war against illicit CD-copying and Internet downloading, seen as the two activities most culpable for declining sales.

According to Jay Berman, chair of the International Federation of Phonographic Industry, global music sales fell 7.2% to $32.2 billion last year. He expects CD sales to fall a further 5% in 2003.

Wire reports contributed to this article.