Monday, November 2, 2009

Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) and Lanham Act: Not Duplicative Damages

St. Luke's Cataract & Laser Inst., P.A. v. Sanderson, 573 F.3d 1186, 1193 (11th Cir. Fla. 2009).

At trial, Plaintiff St. Luke's sued Dr. Sanderson and his LLC, alleging that Dr. Sanderson made unauthorized use of the domain names and, and the website the to promote his practice after he had resigned from practicing with St. Luke’s.

The jury found for Dr. Sanderson on a copyright infringement claim, but for St. Luke’s on claims of service mark infringement and ACPA. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida declared the ACPA damages should be reduced as duplicative of the service mark damages. Both parties appealed.

The appellate court disagreed with the reduction in ACPA damages. The appeals court found that that ACPA at 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125(d)(3) provided for damages even if duplicative of other damages because the text explicitly states that damages for cyberpiracy are “in addition to” any other available civil remedies.

The appellate court further explained that the damages for ACPA cannot be duplicative for damages for service mark infringement under the Lanham Act because ACPA requires the additional showing of bad faith intent to profit from a domain name.

1 comment:

  1. Consumer protection laws cover a vast range of infringements, but hold in common that the consumer has the right to seek compensation for negligence and fraud in these areas, among others including Travel and Hotel scams, Identity Theft, Purchase Protection problems, Faulty Goods, Credit and Banking difficulties.