week6 - Dr Falwell claimed that Mr Lamparello violated the...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Dr. Falwell claimed that Mr. Lamparello violated the laws of trademark infringement, false designation of origin, unfair competition and cybersquatting (Lamparello v Falwell, 2004). Dr. Falwell’s website is “falwell.com.” Mr. Lamparello created a site called “fallwell.com” and continuously spoke against Dr. Falwell’s content on homosexuality. Clearly Mr. Lamparello hoped to prey on those individuals who misspelled Dr. Falwells website. In the district court the judge decided with Dr. Falwell because there were many similarities in the construction of the two sites. These similarities could cause confusion. Mr. Lamparello was charged with cybersquatting because the “operator’s activities clearly evidenced a bad faith intent to profit from using the domain name at issue” (Lamparello v Falwell, 2004). My Falwell filed a claim using the Lanham Act to justify his case. A year later the district court reversed the judgment. They looked at “fallwell.com” as a forum for Mr. Lamparello to express his first amendment rights. They explained
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 12/24/2010 for the course BUSI 561 taught by Professor Self during the Fall '10 term at Liberty.

Page1 / 2

week6 - Dr Falwell claimed that Mr Lamparello violated the...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online