ACPA Restrictions On Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act does not expressly recognize reverse domain name hijacking and often only limits defendants’ recovery to retention or transference of the domain name. It also fails to provide any remedies for victims of attempted reverse cybersquatting. However, the statute permits some monetary relief where bad faith, reckless disregard or the willful violation of a court order are involved.
Similarly, a 1975 amendment to the Lanham Act gives courts discretion in awarding reasonable attorneys’ fees to a prevailing party in “exceptional” circumstances. In attempting to define “exceptional,” Circuit courts are split as to what objectively constitutes malicious, fraudulent, or deliberate misconduct. Some courts award such fees where bad faith or baseless litigation is involved while other courts look for economic coercion or failure to reference controlling law. Nevertheless, due to the inherent animosity arising from being sued, courts generally hold prevailing defendants to a higher level of scrutiny, requiring vexatious or harassing conduct to shift attorney’s fees in their favor.
Read more about this topic: Reverse Domain Hijacking
Famous quotes containing the words reverse and/or domain:
“Now listen, buddy, there are a few corny ideas you got to get out of your head if you’re going to fly an airplane. Most things are just the reverse from what people think. The higher you are the safer you are. The Earth down there, that, that’s your enemy because once you hit that, boy, you splatter.”
—Dalton Trumbo (1905–1976)
“In the domain of Political Economy, free scientific inquiry meets not merely the same enemies as in all other domains. The peculiar nature of the material it deals with, summons as foes into the field of battle the most violent, mean and malignant passions of the human breast, the Furies of private interest.”
—Karl Marx (1818–1883)