We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 29

Do you want your name to be part of a new .xxx domain? What trademark owners need to know

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • Global, USA
  • -
  • May 9 2011

There is a great deal of controversy and debate among brand owners about how to deal with the issuance of new top-level domains (TLD) by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN

Pre-register your .xxx domain names now

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 15 2011

Although .xxx domain names will not become generally available to the public until December 6, 2011, many registrars are offering pre-registration of these domain names now

Google AdWords decision in Europe: trademark owners may prevent competitors from using trademarks as keywords

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • European Union
  • -
  • September 27 2011

Remember last year when the European Union’s Court of Justice ruled that Google did not violate European Union law by selling trademarks as keywords and thereby permitting advertisers to purchase and use keywords corresponding to their competitor’s trademarks in Google ads?

A new domain name system is coming are you ready?

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • Global
  • -
  • June 21 2011

Following years of debate and discussion, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) announced yesterday at a special meeting in Singapore that it had approved a plan to bring sweeping changes to the Internet’s generic top level domain (gTLD) structure

What the .XXX “Sunrise B Period” means for trademark registration owners

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • Global
  • -
  • August 19 2011

Are you concerned that the name of your business or the trademark used in connection with your best-selling product will be used in connection with an adult entertainment website given the soon-to-be launched .XXX domain names?

Google AdWords litigation trademark holders denied class certification in U.S. lawsuits

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 5 2011

In the latest Google AdWords decision, a U.S. Federal District Court judge in Texas refused to certify two classes of advertisers who filed separate infringement suits against Google Inc

Sunrise period ends on October 28th for .xxx domains

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • Global
  • -
  • October 26 2011

Only two days remain to submit applications to block registration of .xxx domain names that include registered trademarks

NewtGingrich.com: a lesson in defensive domain name registration and maintenance

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 22 2011

Not only is Newt Gingrich slipping in recent polls in his efforts to become the presidential nominee for the Republic Party, but he now has a domain name problem

Using online shame as a defense to a trademark infringement claim may not alway be effective

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 27 2012

The Wall Street Journal had a piece recently about how the recipients of trademark infringement cease and desist letters are increasingly using ”online shame” to gain leverage in disputes with trademark owners

Yahoo! wins $610 million trademark infringement and CAN-SPAM award over Nigerian Advance Fee Fraud suit

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 15 2011

This week, Yahoo! won a $610 million default judgment in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in a case involving the infamous Nigerian Advance Fee Fraud perpetrated through the Defendants’ infringing use of Yahoo!’s trademarks and spam