Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Company Name in URL Not Copyright Infringement

Posted by Zonk on from the insert-hair-jokes-here dept.

Christoph writes "CNN reports that a man's website, http://www.bosleymedical.com, criticizing the Bosely Medical Institute does not infringe the institute's copyright on its name. The man's attorney is quoted as saying that the court's decision 'is an important victory for free speech on the Internet. It makes clear that consumers can use a trade name for a company they want to criticize.' The appeals court, however, reinstated part of the lawsuit in which Bosley alleged that Kremer is violating a so-called cybersquatting law by allegedly attempting to sell the site to Bosley in exchange for removing the disparaging material."

4 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. copyright? by latroM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are probably talking about the trademark law. But that's what you get when you use the term intellectual property, more confusion.

  2. You keep using that word. by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The linked article seems to conflate copyright and trademark. I imagine this is a trademark dispute, not copyright. I don't think you can copyright anything as simple as a name.

    --

    There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
  3. Re:They should have waited by LiENUS · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reason he got away with this is because he was not selling the domain name for money. The judge ruled since he was not linking to competing hair loss clinics it was ok.

  4. Re:Maybe BosleyMedicalSucks.com, but this? by Yolegoman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Time for a new TLD: .sucks.