Can a company that owns the trademark name....Shut a fan site down?

Epoman

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2003
2,984
0
0
So for example if I were to buy cokeacolasucks.com could they force me to shut the site down? That is just an example, I love COKE. :)

For example all of the "fan" sites like for IPOD or XBOX.

Can they legally force me to shut down my site?

Let's say I used no trademarked images or logos of theirs what-so-ever, I just have used the domain name.

- Epoman
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
cokeacola... seriously? I don't think they have that trademarked.

I don't know the answer to your question, sorry. It may depend on whether you attempt to mislead people into believing you are affiliated with the trademark owner.

http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

You can't use somebody else's trademark in a way that would steal the value of the mark, or in a way that might make people confuse you with the real owner of the mark, or which might allow you to profit from the mark's good name. For example, if I were giving advice on music videos, I would be very wary of trying to label my works with a name like "mtv." :) You can use marks to critcise or parody the holder, as long as it's clear you aren't the holder.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
167
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
As far as I know, they can't. I believe the issue was already answered in the courts. Courts ruled (IIRC) that it was protected 1st amendment speech, AND reasonable visitors to the site would obviously know that the site wasn't affiliated with the company.
 

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
Sixth Circuit Supports Sucks Sites

Abstract: The Sixth Circuit (which covers Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio and Michigan) held that a domain name holder's use of another's trademark in a 'fan' site did not run afoul of Section 1114 of the Lanham Act because of the presence of both a prominent disclaimer on the site disavowing any affiliation with mark owner, and a link to plaintiff's official web site. The domain holder's use of the trademarks in conjunction with the word "sucks" in the domain names of non-commercial complaint sites did not violate Section 1114 of the Lanham Act because there was no likelihood of consumer confusion arising from that type of use, and because such speech is protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution. The Taubman Company v. Webfeats, et al., Nos. 01-2648/2725 (6th Cir., February 7, 2003).