Legal Question in Intellectual Property in Michigan

Re: Imitating Another Website

You have good instincts. It is clearly not a good idea. I assume you mean that the domain name incorporates either the company name or a trademark name owned by someone else, and the domain name varies by addition of an "s" or other minor alteration, correct?

This is actionable under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, 15 USC 1125(d). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act.

Similarly, this is actionable under US Trademark Law, 15 U.S.C., as trademark infringement. The crux of a suit for trademark infringement is 'likelihood of confusion' by the relevant consuming public. Initial interest confusion (when a consumer is misdirected to a competitor website) has been considered confusion by some courts. If the website to which the consumer is diverted is designed to confuse the consumer, this likelihood of confusion is magnified. While actual consumer confusion is not necessary, it is often put forth as the strongest evidence of 'likelihood of confusion'. The remedies under a suit for trademark infringement would include a preliminary injunction, damages (defendant's profits or plaintiff's lost profits), and permanent injunction.

In the above civil actions, a plaintiff with also include other causes of action, such as unfair competition, deceptive business practices, etc., many of which are provided for in both state and federal law.

In cases involving domain names, a civil suit is often accompanied by an arbitration proceeding called a "UDRP", Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy. See http://www.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp.htm

In this action, the trademark owner (and/or prior rights owner) requests that the infringing domain name(s) be transferred to them. It is well established policy in a UDRP that domain names which incorporate a trademark and alter it by adding an "s" or "-" or other nondistinctive matter are "confusingly similar" under the UDRP (I litigated and won such a case, and I cited many prior decisions). Additionally, to succeed in a UDRP action, the prior rights holder must prove that the domain name holder both registered and used the domain name in bad faith. It is clear that when a domain name holder adopts the name to confuse and divert internet traffic, it is considered bad faith under the UDRP. The sole remedy under the UDRP is transfer of the domain names, but again, this action is often accompanied by a civil suit which seeks monetary damage.

This is just a brief overview of the laws and actions which can and more than likely will be taken against your company if you register TRADEMARKS.com domain names and design websites to confuse consumers. It's not even a borderline determination, in my opinion.

You understand that I am not your attorney, and in order to receive definitive legal advice, you should retain your own attorney.