''People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney'', 263 F.3d 359 (4th Cir. 2001), was an

Internet domain The Internet (or internet) is the global system of interconnected computer networks that uses the Internet protocol suite (TCP/IP) to communicate between networks and devices. It is a network of networks that consists of private, publ ...

trademark infringement Trademark infringement is a violation of the exclusive rights attached to a trademark without the authorization of the trademark owner or any licensees (provided that such authorization was within the scope of the licence). Infringement may occ ...

decision by the

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (in case citations, 4th Cir.) is a United States federal court, federal court located in Richmond, Virginia, with appellate jurisdiction over the United States district court, district cou ...

. The ruling became an early precedent on the nature of

domain names In the Internet, a domain name is a string that identifies a realm of administrative autonomy, authority, or control. Domain names are often used to identify services provided through the Internet, such as websites, email services, and more. D ...

as both trademarked intellectual property and free speech.

Background

In 1995, Michael Doughney registered the domain name peta.org for his website titled "People Eating Tasty Animals".McCullagh, Declan (August 25, 2001)
"Ethical Treatment of PETA Domain"
. ''

Wired Wired may refer to: Arts, entertainment, and media Music * ''Wired'' (Jeff Beck album), 1976 * ''Wired'' (Hugh Cornwell album), 1993 * ''Wired'' (Mallory Knox album), 2017 * "Wired", a song by Prism from their album '' Beat Street'' * "Wired ...

''. The website contained links to over 30 sites including some that promoted the sale of

leather goods Leather is a strong, flexible and durable material obtained from the tanning, or chemical treatment, of animal skins and hides to prevent decay. The most common leathers come from cattle, sheep, goats, equine animals, buffalo, pigs and hogs, ...

and meats. At the bottom of the page, the website inquired "Feeling lost? Offended? Perhaps you should, like, ''exit immediately''" and provided a link to the official

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA; ) is an American animal rights nonprofit organization based in Norfolk, Virginia, and led by Ingrid Newkirk, its international president. Founded in March 1980 by Newkirk and animal rights ...

(PETA) website,''People for Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney''
263 F. 3d 359
(4th Cir., 2001). which due to Doughney's action had to use a less intuitive domain name. In 1996, PETA requested that Doughney voluntarily transfer the domain name, because it owned the trademark for "PETA" though it had not yet used the acronym as a domain name. Doughney refused to do so, leading to the lawsuit, in which PETA alleged that Doughney committed

trademark dilution Trademark dilution is a trademark law concept giving the owner of a famous trademark standing to forbid others from using that mark in a way that would lessen its uniqueness. In most cases, trademark dilution involves an unauthorized use of anoth ...

unfair competition Anti-competitive practices are business or government practices that prevent or reduce competition in a market. Antitrust laws ensure businesses do not engage in competitive practices that harm other, usually smaller, businesses or consumers. ...

, and

cybersquatting Cybersquatting (also known as domain squatting) is the practice of registering, trafficking in, or using an Internet domain name, with a bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else. The term is derived ...

. The case was first heard at the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.''People for Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney''
113 F.Supp.2d 915
(E.D. Va., 2000). Initially, PETA did not seek compensation other than enjoining Doughney from using the peta.org domain and seeking an order for him to transfer peta.org to PETA. Meanwhile, Doughney claimed that his website was a

parody A parody is a creative work designed to imitate, comment on, and/or mock its subject by means of satire, satirical or irony, ironic imitation. Often its subject is an Originality, original work or some aspect of it (theme/content, author, style, e ...

, which was an act of

free speech Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The right to freedom of expression has been recognise ...

and which should absolve him of the trademark infringement allegation. The District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled in favor of PETA and ordered Doughney to stop using the peta.org domain and to hand it over to the organization. Doughney appealed this decision to the

Fourth Circuit The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (in case citations, 4th Cir.) is a federal court located in Richmond, Virginia, with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts: * District of Maryland ...

. The district court did not honor PETA's request for Doughney to pay its legal fees, so the organization cross-appealed that decision.

Circuit court opinion

Accusation of trademark infringement

The acronym "PETA" was a registered trademark that belonged to

. Thus the trademark infringement claim centered on whether the "defendant used the mark 'in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising' of goods or services." The circuit court concluded that because the website may have confused users who wanted to buy items from the true PETA organization, it was "connected" to commerce even though Doughney did not sell any goods or services. Doughney claimed that his peta.org website was a

of the PETA organization, and was free speech permissible under the

First Amendment First most commonly refers to: * First, the ordinal form of the number 1 First or 1st may also refer to: Acronyms * Faint Images of the Radio Sky at Twenty-Centimeters, an astronomical survey carried out by the Very Large Array * Far Infrared a ...

. The court relied on ''Cliffs Notes, Inc. v. Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.'' to rule that, in order to constitute a parody, Doughney's peta.org site should simultaneously convey that (1) the site was not the official PETA site, and (2) that it was merely a parody. The court held that the domain name "peta.org" implied ownership by the organization, and thus did not qualify as a parody. The court found it unnecessary to review the content of Doughney's site and only considered his use of the domain name. Thus, while the court alluded to Doughney's First Amendment right to create a parody, it ruled that doing so in the form of a website with a domain name that infringed on the target's trademark was not allowable due to the possible confusion for viewers of the site over its ownership. This refusal to consider a site's content when determining whether it qualifies as a parody was arguably rejected by the Fourth Circuit in ''

Lamparello v. Falwell ''Lamparello v. Falwell'', 420 F.3d 309 (4th Cir. 2005), was a legal case heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit concerning allegations of cybersquatting and trademark infringement. The dispute centered on the righ ...

'' (2005), where in discussing ''PETA v. Doughney'', the court wrote, " determine whether a likelihood of confusion exists, a court should not consider how closely a fragment of a given use duplicates the trademark, but must instead consider whether the use in its entirety creates a likelihood of confusion."

Accusation of cybersquatting

PETA also alleged that Doughney's use of its trademarked acronym in the domain name for his website, before they had the chance to do the same, was a violation of the

Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d),(passed as part of ) is a U.S. law enacted in 1999 that established a cause of action for registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name confusingly similar to, or ...

(ACPA). Before and during the litigation, Doughney made statements suggesting that PETA should "

settle Settle or SETTLE may refer to: __NOTOC__ Places * Settle, Kentucky, United States, an unincorporated community * Settle, North Yorkshire, a town in England ** Settle Rural District, a historical administrative district Music * Settle (band), an in ...

" with him and "make him an offer" for the domain name.U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, ''PETA v. Doughney'' https://cyber.harvard.edu/stjohns/PETA_v_Doughney.html This was seen by the court as his attempt to profit from the peta.org domain name. Because of this and the fact that the domain name is identical to the distinctive PETA trademark, the court ruled that Doughney violated the ACPA. However, the court also held that PETA was not entitled to monetary damages because Doughney registered and used the domain name prior to the ACPA's enactment. Instead, Doughney was merely required to surrender the domain name. This was soon completed and peta.org now leads to the official website for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

Request for compensation

The court ruled that PETA was ineligible for an award of attorney's fees because Doughney did not maliciously infringe the trademark, believing at the time that he could create a parody website that would be protected by the

References

External links

''From Book Covers to Domain Names: Searching for the True Meaning of the'' Cliffs Notes ''Temporal Test for Parody''
7 J. High Tech. L. 19 (2007). * — Fourth Circuit opinion affirming the grant of summary judgment to PETA. {{DEFAULTSORT:People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals V. Doughney United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit cases United States trademark case law People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals 2001 in United States case law Domain Name System United States Internet case law