People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney

263 F.3d 359 (4th Cir. 2001), "affirming" 113 F. Supp. 2d 915 (E.D. Va. 2000)

In "People for Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney", the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court decision holding Michael T. Doughney liable for trademark infringement and cybersquatting.

In 1995, Doughney registered the domain name peta.org for the fictitious organization "People Eating Tasty Animals." The website contained links to over 30 sites including some that promoted the sale of leather goods 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 actual People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals website.

PETA requested that Doughney transfer the domain name, but Doughney refused to do so, leading to the lawsuit. PETA asserted claims of service mark infringement, unfair competition, trademark dilution, and cybersquatting.

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia held that the peta.org site was used in commerce because it prevented consumers from reaching the People for Ethical Treatment of Animals website and it contained links to commercial sites. A likelihood of confusion was easily proven after Doughney's admission.

The District Court and the Fourth Circuit both rejected Doughney's assertion that the website was a parody of the PETA website. Relying on the "Cliffs Notes, Inc. v. Bantam Doubleday Dell Publ'g Group, Inc.", both courts ruled that in order to constitute a parody, the peta.org website must simultaneously convey that (1) the site was the PETA site and (2) the site was not the PETA site.

External links

* [http://www.jhtl.org/docs/pdf/landry_note.pdf "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.