Teresa Scassa - Blog

Displaying items by tag: Internet

Insurance Corp. of British Columbia v. Stainton Ventures Ltd. is a recent decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court that addresses the issue of the use of trademarks in domain names. The plaintiff in the case, the Insurance Corp. of British Columbia (ICBC) objected to the use by the defendant Stainton Ventures Ltd. of its ICBC mark in its domain names, on its website, and on a booklet which it produced for sale. The defendant, through its website and booklet, offered advice on how to deal with B.C.’s motor vehicle insurer.

The defendant’s website was initially established in 2006 with the URLs <fightICBC.ca> and <fightICBC.com>. The site provided information about dealing with ICBC, and also listed the names and contact information of health care professionals. At the time, ICBC contacted the listed health care professionals and drew their attention to the listings. The defendant received feedback from a number of these professionals, who apparently objected to the rather adversarial domain name of the website. It subsequently changed its business cards, website references and other materials to ICBCadvice, and registered the new domain names of <icbcadvice.ca> and <icbcadvice.com>. In 2008, it began offering for sale from its website a publication titled ICBC Claim Guide.

In 2009 the defendant received its first cease and desist letter regarding the use of the ICBC acronym. Justice Grauer of the B.C. Supreme Court noted that although it was only in 2008 that there was an actual commercial offering from the site, it was clear from the outset that the site had served a marketing function for the defendant’s law practice. After receipt of the cease and desist letter, the title of the claim guide was changed to ICBCadvice Claim Guide. No other concessions were made by the defendant.

The plaintiff applied by way of summary trial for declarations that the defendant was infringing its rights in its official mark ICBC, that it was passing off its wares and services as those of ICBC, and that it was in violation of s. 52 of the Competition Act for having made false or misleading representations. The court ruled against ICBC on all counts.

The first issue was whether the defendant had infringed the plaintiff’s rights in ICBC’s official mark “ICBC”. Section 11 of the Trade-marks Act provides that “No person shall use in connection with a business, as a trade-mark or otherwise, any mark adopted contrary to section 9 or 10 of this Act....” Section 9(i)(n)(iii) prohibits the adoption of a mark “in connection with a business, as a trade-mark or otherwise, any mark consisting of, or so nearly resembling as to be likely to be mistaken for” an official mark. Justice Grauer rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the defendant’s mark was identical to its ICBC mark because it reproduced the ICBC mark. Instead, he chose to consider whether “ICBCadvice” so nearly resembles “ICBC” as to likely be mistaken for it. Justice Grauer was persuaded by the defendant’s argument that there was no evidence of confusion on the part of visitors to the website. He noted: “The evidence just does not support the contention that through its domain names, the defendant either intended or accomplished the redirection to its site of traffic looking for ICBC’s own website...” (at para 25). Further, he found that drivers in B.C., who were very familiar with the ICBC mark, would not likely be confused into thinking that the ICBCadvice domain names were linked to the official mark. He concluded that “they would take it as identifying the subject-matter of the site, not whose site it is” (at para 26). However Justice Grauer does not consider whether consumers would be likely to think that the subject matter of the site (advice about ICBC) emanated from the insurance company itself, as opposed to some other party. In fact, the official ICBC site also provides advice to customers on how to proceed with making a claim.

Justice Grauer noted that he also would not have found the “fighticbc” domain names to be infringing. There would seem to be at least an argument that “fighticbc” is much less likely to be confusing than “icbcadvice”, since ICBC is less likely to advocate fighting itself than it might be to provide advice to motorists on how to proceed with a claim. The discussion in this respect is unsatisfying. While most domain name cases seem to reject domain names for critical websites that merely use the unmodified trademark of the target company, there is still a lack of clarity as to what kind of modifying language will suffice to make it clear that the site to which the domain name resolves is not that of the target company. In addition, the case law around domain names and critical sites usually involves non-commercial criticism or protest sites; the impact of the commercial dimensions of the defendant’s site in this case is not fully discussed. While I do not necessarily disagree with the outcome of this case, it would have been helpful to have a closer consideration of these key issues.

Justice Grauer did find that the original version of the defendant’s commercial claim guide violated s. 11 of the Trade-marks Act. Its cover featured ICBC in large type with “Claim Guide” below in a much smaller font. However, the revised cover, which reads “ICBCadvice Claim Guide” passed muster. He made an order restraining the distribution of the original guide, but not the revised version.

Justice Grauer dismissed the passing off arguments relating to the website and the domain names. Although it was clear that ICBC had goodwill in its mark, he found that the “ordinary average automobile insurance customer” would not be confused into believing there was a business connection between the defendant’s website and the complainant. Once again, his analysis seems to focus almost exclusively on the issue of actual confusion. He wrote: “I cannot see how an average customer would be deceived into thinking that the website is somehow associated with or approved by ICBC. There is no evidence of either actual confusion or likelihood of confusion, and as noted, a likelihood of confusion is not so obvious that evidence is unnecessary” (at para 44). He rejected the plaintiff’s argument that search engines would turn up the defendant’s site in any search using the term “ICBC”. He wrote: “The behaviour of search engines is not, in my view, evidence of anything other than the operation of an algorithm, and search-engine marketing. It is certainly not evidence of confusion” (at para 46). He went on to ask: “Is the public so naive as to assume that every hit returned to a search for “ICBC” is somehow associated with or endorsed by the Insurance Company of British Columbia? I suspect that the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China would be rather distressed if that proved to be so” (at para 46). In his view, “the average customer of normal intelligence would not be led astray, and would have no difficulty recognizing that ICBCadvice.com would probably relate to how to deal with ICBC in an arm’s length or even adversarial sense, rather than in a manner endorsed by ICBC” (at para 48). Justice Grauer also quickly dismissed the claims of false and misleading representations under the Competition Act.

Published in Blog

The globalized and decentralized Internet has become the new locus for a wide range of human activity, including commerce, crime, communications and cultural production. Activities which were once at the core of domestic jurisdiction have moved onto the Internet, and in doing so, have presented numerous challenges to the ability of states to exercise jurisdiction. In writing about these challenges, some scholars have characterized the Internet as a separate “space” and many refer to state jurisdiction over Internet activities as “extraterritorial”. Rob Currie and I have recently published an article in the Georgetown Journal of International Law that explores these challenges in the context of the overall international law of jurisdiction, rather than focusing on any one substantive area. We argue that while the Internet may push at the boundaries of traditional principles of jurisdiction in public international law, it has not supplanted them. We explore the principles of jurisdiction, including the evolving concept of “qualified territoriality”, and demonstrate how they continue to apply in the Internet context. We also examine how states exercise their authority with respect to Internet activities by addressing governance issues, by engaging in normative ordering for the Internet, and by extending the reach of their domestic laws to capture Internet-based activities. The article concludes by offering a set of “first principles,” in the form of policy precepts, to guide the evolution of public international law norms and to address problems particular to the context of the global Internet.  You can find it here: http://gjil.org/wp-content/uploads/archives/42.4/zsx00411001017.PDF.

Published in Extraterritoriality

Stephen Coughlan, Robert Currie, Hugh Kindred and Teresa Scassa, Global Reach, Local Grasp: Constructing Extraterritorial Jurisdiction in the Age of Globalization, Prepared for the Law Commission of Canada, May 31, 2006.

Published in Reports/Consultations

“Routine Border Searches of Laptop Computers” (2008) 5:7 Can. Privacy L. Rev. 72-74.

“Social Networking, Privacy and Civil Litigation: Recent Developments in Canadian Law”, forthcoming in (2011) 7:7 Can. Privacy L. Rev.

"The Best Things in Law are Free:  Towards Quality Free Public Access to Primary Legal Materials in Canada", (2000) 23 Dalhousie Law Journal 301-336

This paper examines the move, in the 1990s in Canada, towards making primary legal materials freely available to the public over the internet.   The paper begins by assessing the situation in Canada at the time of writing, and the need for a centralized and harmonized electronic portal for primary legal materials.  I consider initiatives in other jurisdictions aimed at providing comprehensive free public access, and explore the rationales for developing and providing such access.  I explore some of the implications and questions raised by the provision of publicly accessible primary legal materials.  These include the concepts of  “public” and “access”, concerns about information monopolies, the role of lawyers as "infomediaries" and the normative implications of "freeing" the law.

Published in Refereed Articles

"Intellectual Property on the Cyber-Picketline:  A Comment on British Columbia Automobile Assn v. Office and Professional Employees' International Union, Local 378", (2002) 39 Alberta Law Review 934-962

This paper is a lengthy and critical comment on the decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court, British Columbia Automobile Assn v. Office and Professional Employees' International Union, Local 378.. The case remains an important decision on issues of passing off, trademark and copyright infringement relating to websites, domain names and meta tags.  In this paper I explore these issues, all of which may commonly arise in situations of alleged competition between websites.  The case thus provides a context for exploring legitimate and unlawful uses of domain names and meta tags, copyright infringement, and web site design, and touches on the role of s. 22 of the Trade-marks Act.  Because BCAA also occurs in the context of a labour dispute, it raises further issues about intellectual property rights and freedom of expression.  In this context, I examine the balance being struck between monopolistic intellectual property rights and the fundamental right of freedom of expression.

Published in Refereed Articles

“Global Reach, Local Grasp: Constructing Extraterritorial Jurisdiction in the Age of Globalization” (2007) 6 Canadian Journal of Law and Technology 29-60. (With Stephen Coughlan, Robert Currie and Hugh Kindred) PDF Available here.

The reach of national law is often greater than its grasp. Canada, like other countries, has effective legal power over its territory and all within it. However, one consequence of the current process of globalization, for good or ill, is that Canadian interests are no longer contained exclusively within Canadian borders. Canada thus finds it increasingly necessary to consider asserting its legal jurisdiction beyond its frontiers. In this we consider issues of jurisdiction, distinguishing between territorial and extraterritorial jurisdiction, and defining and discussing legislative/prescriptive jurisdiction, executive/enforcement jurisdiction, investigative jurisdiction and judicial/adjudicative jurisdiction. We discuss the mechanics of extraterritorial action, and  the means by which extraterritorial action is taken.  We also consider the policy justifications which have primarily motivated Canada to act extraterritorially in the past. In the second part of the paper, we consider whether the lessons of the past are applicable to the future. Primarily we will do this by pursuing four “case studies” of areas of law which raise new and challenging issues. These include i) the internet; ii) personal data protection, iii) human rights and iv) competition in the marketplace.

Published in Refereed Articles

“The Inadvertent Disclosure of Personal Health Information through Peer-to-peer File Sharing Programs”, in JAMIA 2010 17: 148-158 ( Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association) (with K. El Emam, E. Neri, E. Jonker, M. Sokolova, L. Peyton, & A. Neisa)

There has been a consistent concern about the inadvertent disclosure of personal information on peer-to-peer file sharing networks. Examples of personal health and financial information being exposed have been published. This paper estimates the extent to which personal health information (PHI) is leaking in this way, and compare that to the extent of leakage of personal financial information (PFI). The paper concludes that there is a real risk of PHI leakage on peer-to-peer file sharing networks, although the risk is not as large as for PFI. Custodians of PHI should not install file sharing applications on their computers, and individuals need to be educated about the proper use of file sharing tools to avoid inadvertent disclosure of their, their family’s, their clients’, or patients’ PHI.

Published in Refereed Articles

Journalistic Purposes and Private Sector Data Protection Legislation: Blogs, Tweets, and Information Maps” (2010) 35 Queen’s Law J. 733-781

This paper explores how changes in the ways in which information is consumed and disseminated by myriad individuals in myriad forms may impact data protection law in Canada. The author uses examples of blogs, Twitter and information maps to illustrate the problems which will inevitably arise when trying to discern which individuals and which information will properly fit into the journalistic purposes exception in Canadian data protection statutes. She suggests that exceptions for the collection, use or disclosure of personal information for journalistic purposes raise vital questions pertaining to the purpose and scope of these exceptions. Recent case law serves to illustrate the difficulties faced by decision-makers in defining the scope of these exceptions, particularly given the need to balance the public right to be informed with individual privacy rights. The author considers the journalistic purposes exceptions in light of the role of journalists by analyzing how reporters’ privilege cases, defamation law (“responsible journalism”) and ethical codes of conduct might affect and inform current Canadian case law. She compares how journalistic purpose exceptions are configured and applied in Australia and the United Kingdom. In the conclusion, the author considers the direction that data protection law in Canada should take. She suggests that a reasonableness test, which attempts to balance the various conflicting interests, should govern decisions on whether information is being provided for a journalistic purpose or for some “other” purpose.

 

 

This paper explores how changes in the ways in which information is consumed and disseminated by myriad individuals in myriad forms may impact data protection law in Canada. The author uses examples of blogs, Twitter and information maps to illustrate the problems which will inevitably arise when trying to discern which individuals and which information will properly fit into the journalistic purposes exception in Canadian data protection statutes. She suggests that exceptions for the collection, use or disclosure of personal information for journalistic purposes raise vital questions pertaining to the purpose and scope of these exceptions. Recent case law serves to illustrate the difficulties faced by decision-makers in defining the scope of these exceptions, particularly given the need to balance the public right to be informed with individual privacy rights. The author considers the journalistic purposes exceptions in light of the role of journalists by analyzing how reporters’ privilege cases, defamation law (“responsible journalism”) and ethical codes of conduct might affect and inform current Canadian case law. She compares how journalistic purpose exceptions are configured and applied in Australia and the United Kingdom. In the conclusion, the author considers the direction that data protection law in Canada should take. She suggests that a reasonableness test, which attempts to balance the various conflicting interests, should govern decisions on whether information is being provided for a journalistic purpose or for some “other” purpose.

Published in Refereed Articles
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 Next > End >>
Page 3 of 4

Canadian Trademark Law

Published in 2015 by Lexis Nexis

Canadian Trademark Law 2d Edition

Buy on LexisNexis

Electronic Commerce and Internet Law in Canada, 2nd Edition

Published in 2012 by CCH Canadian Ltd.

Electronic Commerce and Internet Law in Canada

Buy on CCH Canadian

Intellectual Property for the 21st Century

Intellectual Property Law for the 21st Century:

Interdisciplinary Approaches

Purchase from Irwin Law