Byline:

Sue Ann Mota

Issue:

VOL. XXI • Spring 2003 • NO. 3 (table of contents)

Abstract:

This article examines the published decisions of the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Sixth, and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals in which there have been interpretations of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (APCA). The article provides summaries of all cases interpreting the ACPA at the time of writing. These cases include: Sporty’s Farm L.L.C. v. Sportman’s Market, Inc.; Northern Light Technology, Inc. v. Northern Lights Club; Sallen v. Corinthians Licenciamentos LTDA; Shields v. Zuccarini; Virtual Works, Inc. v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.; People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney; Porsche Cars North America, Inc. v. Porsche.net; Harrods Limited v. Sixty Internet Domain Names; Bird v. Parsons; and Interstellar Starship Services, Ltd. v. Epix, Inc. Analyses of the Courts’ various applications of the APCA are also included.

Related Articles:

• IS THE ACPA A SAFE HAVEN FOR TRADEMARK INFRINGERS? —RETHINKING THE UNILATERAL APPLICATION OF THE LANHAM ACT

• The Black Box Canon of Statutory Interpretation: Why the Courts Should Treat Technology like a Black Box in Interpreting Computer Crime Statutes

• Reflection on the Finality of Panel's Decisions in Domain Names Dispute Resolution Process, with Reference to China's Practice

• An Analysis That is Not "Ad Hoc": The Bifurcated Uniform Analysis That The Federal Courts Should Follow to Determine Computer Program Copyright Non-literal Infringement

• The Federal Trade Commission's Commitment to On-Line Consumer Protection