Originally published August 29, 2011. Updated October 2026.
In August 2011, attorneys Noah Fardo and William F. “Bill” Rogel reached a confidential resolution of a federal cybersquatting claim. The defendant was accused of using domain names similar to its competitors’ to divert web traffic to its own website.
The federal Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) targets people who, in bad faith, register or use a domain name that is confusingly similar to someone else’s distinctive mark. To bring a claim, a plaintiff generally must show:
The challenge often lies in proving that the mark is distinctive, especially when it is not a registered trademark, as in this case. The plaintiff must then show that the public associates the name with its business, which is called secondary meaning. Courts have looked at factors such as:
Because actual damages are often hard to prove in these cases, the law lets a plaintiff choose statutory damages instead. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(d), a court may award statutory damages of not less than $1,000 and not more than $100,000 per domain name, as the court considers just. In our experience, the largest outcomes involve clear bad faith, such as taking a competitor’s domain name and trying to sell it back at a steep price.
This case is part of our firm’s history. Today our practice focuses on personal injury, medical malpractice and property tax appeals. Learn more about Noah Fardo and Bill Rogel.
Call 412-802-6666, text 412-855-5511, or send us a message.
Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Every case is different.
