In the months leading up to the FDA shutting down plaintiff’s business, one of the co-owners of the business left and set up a competing enterprise. For a few weeks, the former co-owner set plaintiff’s domain name to forward to the new company’s website.
Plaintiff sued and the court held that redirecting the URL was a violation of the Lanham Act (the federal law relating to trademarks and unfair competition). But plaintiff was not entitled to any damages because it failed to show that the redirection caused any lost sales. During that time, 133 users who tried to access plaintiff’s website were redirected to the new company’s website, and of those 133 visitors, only two submitted inquiries and neither customer who submitted an inquiry placed an order.
ABH Nature’s Products, Inc. v. Supplement Manufacturing Partner, Inc., 2024 WL 13452228 (E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024)
See also:
- Personal name in web search results did not support Lanham Act claim
- E.D.N.Y. holds purchase of competitor’s trademark to trigger sponsored listing not trademark “use” under Lanham Act
- Mall owner uses Section 43(a) of Lanham Act to successfully challenge domain name registrations