The Fourth Circuit held that a domain 'registration' actionable under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act includes later re-registrations, then sustained in rem jurisdiction over PRU.COM and a bad-faith finding against its Chinese owner.
The Fourth Circuit held that fallwell.com was neither infringing nor cybersquatting, because likelihood of confusion turns on the whole site and the ACPA targets profit-seeking, not criticism.
The Fourth Circuit held that 'People Eating Tasty Animals' could not shield peta.org behind the First Amendment, because a domain identical to a mark conveys ownership before any visitor sees the joke.
Decided weeks after the ACPA became law, the Second Circuit's sportys.com ruling supplied the template for how courts would read bad-faith intent, distinctiveness, and a brand-new statute applied to conduct that predated it.
