Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

Protest Site Grounded for Using Adulterated Trademarks

By Mark Davis on August 14, 2017
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

In United Airlines, Inc. v. Cooperstock, 2017 FC 616, the Federal Court of Canada enjoined a disgruntled traveler from using colorable variations of United Airlines’ trademarks on a protest website he set up at www.untied.com.

Using an anagram of the official www.united.com website as a domain name, the impugned material posted on the site included adulterated versions of United Airlines’ trademarks such as:

United Airlines succeeded in its action for trademark infringement, passing off, depreciation of goodwill and copyright infringement.  Presented with “valuable and credible” evidence of actual confusion from a travel agent who has mistakenly tried to file a complaint with the airline on Cooperstock’s website, the Court found:

  • A trademark can be used in association with a “service” even where there is no monetary or commercial element;
  • parody should be understood as having two basic elements:
    • the evocation of an existing work while exhibiting noticeable differences; and
    • the expression of mockery or humour;
  • parody and satire are not a defence to trademark infringement in Canada;
  • parody and satire may fall within the fair dealing exception to copyright infringement but not on the facts of this case because:
    • the defendant’s real purpose was to defame or punish United Airlines; and
    • using the copyrighted works contributed to consumer confusion.

Brand owners have struggled to stop unauthorized use of their trademarks on protest and parody sites.  The Court recognized that free speech is important but not unrestricted and cannot be invoked to protect clear misappropriation of trademarks. Clearly, adulterated versions of trademarks cannot be used on protest sites when they cause actual confusion as to the site’s authenticity.

Notably,  despite finding actual confusion, the Court stopped short of ordering the www.untied.com domain name transferred.

 

Photo of Mark Davis Mark Davis

Mark Davis is a corporate M&A lawyer who represents and advises clients on a range of transactions with a particular focus on cross-border leveraged buyouts (LBOs) and exits. He has broad experience in private equity and other merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions and…

Mark Davis is a corporate M&A lawyer who represents and advises clients on a range of transactions with a particular focus on cross-border leveraged buyouts (LBOs) and exits. He has broad experience in private equity and other merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions and has represented many buyout funds in Europe and the United States in connection with complex cross-border deals. Read Mark Davis’ full bio.

Read more about Mark DavisEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Intellectual Property
  • Organization:
    Norton Rose Fulbright

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • Resource Center
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center
  • Blogging 101

New to the Network

  • Tennessee Insurance Litigation Blog
  • Claims & Sustains
  • New Jersey Restraining Order Lawyers
  • New Jersey Gun Lawyers
  • Blog of Reason
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo