The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act is a legislation designed to safeguard the brand names of trademark owners from unauthorized use on the internet. In cases where an individual registers a domain name that is identical or closely resembles a trademark, and does so with the intention of profiting from it in bad faith, the trademark owner has the option to seek legal recourse to have the domain name transferred to them. However, if the person who registered the domain name has a valid and legitimate reason for doing so, they may be permitted to retain ownership.
The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) is a federal law enacted in 1999 that grants trademark owners the ability to obtain a court order for the transfer of a domain name from a cybersquatter to the rightful trademark owner. To establish a violation of the ACPA, the trademark owner must demonstrate the following: the mark and the domain name are either identical or confusingly similar, the mark was distinctive at the time of domain name registration, the trademark owner used the mark commercially prior to the registration of the domain name, and the domain registrant acted in bad faith with the intention of profiting from the use of the trademark. Registering a domain name with the intent to sell it to the trademark owner is considered an act of bad faith. However, if the defendant can provide a legitimate reason for registering the domain name, they may be permitted to retain ownership. For instance, if an individual registers the domain name “CocaColaSucks.com” with the purpose of criticizing the company rather than profiting from the trademark, they may be allowed to keep the domain name. Conversely, if someone registers the domain name “CocaCola.com” with the intention of selling it to the company for financial gain, they would be in violation of the ACPA.
The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) is a federal law enacted in 1999 that provides protection against the bad faith registration and use of domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to trademarks.
Cybersquatting refers to the practice of registering, trafficking, or using a domain name with the intent to profit from the goodwill of someone else’s trademark. It often involves registering domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to well-known trademarks.
Under the ACPA, a trademark owner can seek injunctive relief, damages (including statutory damages ranging from $1,000 to $100,000 per domain name), and the transfer or cancellation of the infringing domain name.
To establish bad faith registration or use under the ACPA, you need to show that the domain name was registered or used with the intent to profit from the trademark owner’s goodwill, and that the registrant had no legitimate right or interest in the domain name.
Yes, the ACPA covers both active and passive use of infringing domain names. If you can demonstrate bad faith registration or use, you may still be able to pursue legal action even if the domain name is not actively being used.
Yes, the ACPA allows for the recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees by the prevailing party in a lawsuit. This provision encourages trademark owners to enforce their rights under the Act.
Yes, there are several defences available to a cybersquatter accused under the ACPA. These include fair use, noncommercial use, and legitimate use of the domain name.
No, the ACPA does not provide for filing complaints with domain name dispute resolution providers like the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP). Instead, it allows for filing a lawsuit in federal court.
Yes, the ACPA can be used to protect personal names or business names that have acquired trademark rights. However, you need to establish that the name has acquired secondary meaning and is distinctive enough to be protected.
No, the ACPA does not provide for liability of domain name registrars or hosting providers. It primarily focuses on the liability of the domain name registrant who engages in bad faith registration or use.
This site contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. Persuing this glossary does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
This glossary post was last updated: 30th April 2024.
To help you cite our definitions in your bibliography, here is the proper citation layout for the three major formatting styles, with all of the relevant information filled in.
- Page URL:https://dlssolicitors.com/define/anti-cybersquatting-consumer-protection-act/
- Modern Language Association (MLA):Anti Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. dlssolicitors.com. DLS Solicitors. May 09 2024 https://dlssolicitors.com/define/anti-cybersquatting-consumer-protection-act/.
- Chicago Manual of Style (CMS):Anti Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. dlssolicitors.com. DLS Solicitors. https://dlssolicitors.com/define/anti-cybersquatting-consumer-protection-act/ (accessed: May 09 2024).
- American Psychological Association (APA):Anti Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. dlssolicitors.com. Retrieved May 09 2024, from dlssolicitors.com website: https://dlssolicitors.com/define/anti-cybersquatting-consumer-protection-act/
Our team of professionals are based in Alderley Edge, Cheshire. We offer clear, specialist legal advice in all matters relating to Family Law, Wills, Trusts, Probate, Lasting Power of Attorney and Court of Protection.
All author posts