Historical Replication Notice This page is a faithful replication of a historical work originally published in 1996 as a website by Jonathan Agmon, Stacey Halpern and David Pauker while LL.M. candidates at The George Washington University Law School. It is reproduced here by Agmon Law Pte. Ltd. for historical and educational purposes. The content reflects the law, technology and internet infrastructure as they existed in 1996 and has not been updated. Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice. Most hyperlinks referenced in the original no longer function.
What's in a Name? (1996) › The Relationship Between Domain Names and Trademarks
A Domain Name May Function as a Trademark

Through the powers and resources of the Internet, users can communicate, explore, educate, advertise, buy and sell. All these quests, done from the sanctity of one's computer, transcend time, space and territorial boundaries. Whether the search is for information, entertainment, conversation, romance, or the holy grail, it is important for those on the net to know where they have been, where they are now, who they are dealing with. They must know that the information or products or romance is real, and how they can find them again.

On the Internet, domain names tell us these things. Thus, in this sense, a "domain name" shares similar qualities with a trademark and may create an expectation about the nature of a product, or the identity of a person or organization found at an address.

The Conflict Between Domain Names and Trademarks

While there are similarities between trademark principles and the use of domain names, a number of problems arise if traditional trademark law is applied to domain names.

For example, an Internet user wants a domain name which is easy to recognize and recall. The world-wide nature of the web and technical limitations often make this difficult, and create conflicts between traditional trademark law and domain names.

Moreover, traditional trademark law, allows identical registrations of the same mark for noncompeting goods or services, provided there is no likelihood of confusion — both Domino's Pizza and Domino Sugar. But, on the Internet, there can be only one domino.com, and it isn't sugar or pizza.

Furthermore, traditional trademark law will not permit registration of generic terms. However, on the Internet "milk", "banana", and "cereal" are all registered domain names.

There are also some people who feel that a domain name is simply an alphanumeric translation of the numeric domain name address and, as such analogous to a street address instead of a trademark.

A Domain Name May Infringe Trademark

Using someone else's trademark as a domain name may constitute infringement of the mark. However, under current trademark laws, not all uses are actionable. For instance, merely registering a domain name may not be sufficient conduct to constitute infringement or dilution. Under some circumstances, even posting a web page under the domain name may not be actionable.

In many situations, domain name disputes can be resolved using traditional trademark principles, such as the dispute over the domain name "kaplan.com."

When Princeton Review registered its competitors domain name "kaplan.com" and posted a page comparing the two courses, it was likely that people who went to the page believed that the page belong to Kaplan Education Centers instead of Princeton Review.

However, what happens when two companies use the same mark for different products or services. In the world outside the Internet there can be two or more Kaplans. On the Internet there can be only one "kaplan.com." For instance, there can be a Kaplan Deli, a Kaplan Clothing, and a Kaplan's Education Centers. Outside the Internet, all these companies can concurrently use the name Kaplan. In fact, all these companies may possess federal trademark registrations. But NSI will registered only one "kaplan.com."

Moreover, outside the Internet, even if Kaplan Deli does not possess a federal trademark registration, it can still defeat a trademark infringement action by demonstrating that it used the name first, or that there is no likelihood of confusion between the two uses.

Thus, the ultimate Internet Network Information Center (InterNIC) and paying a fee to Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI).

NSI's Dispute Resolution Policy itself conflicts with traditional trademark principles. NSI continues to register domain names on a first come, first served basis, will not perform any trademark searches or otherwise investigate whether the applicant has rights to the requested domain name.

The Policy requires only representations by the applicant regarding their rights to use the domain name, and that, as far as the applicant knows, the name does not infringe any intellectual property rights.

NSI's Dispute Resolution Policy allows the owner of a federally registered trademark or foreign trademark owner to register a complaint with NSI if its identical trademark is registered as a domain name by someone else.

The original domain name holder can continue to use the domain name if they: (1) registered the domain name before the complaining party obtained its federal trademark (prior rights), or have a federal trademark registration; (2) post a bond; and (3) agree to indemnify NSI against legal liability and expenses. If the original domain name holder complies with these requirements, NSI will allow the original domain name holder to keep using the domain name, unless and until NSI receives a court order or arbitrator's judgment to the contrary.

If the original domain name holder does not have a registered trademark, NSI will asked him to relinquish his right to the domain name. If the original domain holder refuses to relinquish the name, NSI will place the name on a "hold" list, unuseable by anyone until resolution of the dispute by a court or settlement between the parties. NSI gives the original domain name holder a 90-day transition period before placing the domain name on hold.

To acquire the disputed domain name, the registered trademark owner must still prove infringement, dilution or some other form of unfair competition. If the registered trademark owner does not prevail, the domain name holder can remove the hold and continue to use the domain name.

However, NSI's Dispute Resolution Policy still allows the owner of a federally registered trademark to receive relief not dissimilar to a preliminary injunction — placing the domain name on hold during the pendency of the litigation — without having to demonstrate any of the substantive requirements of a preliminary injunction, such as irreparable harm, a likelihood of success on the merits, or even posting a bond. Instead, the owner of a federal trademark can force NSI to place a domain name on hold simply upon proof of federal trademark registration.

What NSI's Dispute Resolution Policy Doesn't Cover: NSI's Dispute Resolution Policy provides no relief to the owner of substantially similar but not identical trademarks, common law trademarks or state registered trademarks. Nor does it deal with concurrent uses of the same trademark, or conflicts between U.S. and foreign trademarks.

For more information relating to domain names and trademarks:

http://www.inter-law.com/files/inp11 Domain names and trademarks, by James Evan.
http://www.inter-law.com/files/inp12 Trademark: Excerpts From Intellectual Property and the National Information Infrastructure: The Report of the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights, Bruce A. Lehman, Chair.
http://www.faegre.com/areas/areaip03.html#thenet Hot Topics in the Law of Trademark and Trade Dress — The Internet.
Scroll to Top

Megan Tay

Associate (legal) 

Intellectual Property, Commercial, M&A, Litigation

Bio: Ms. Tay joined Agmon Law after acquiring her experience in a number of international law firms and has completed her training at one of the largest Singapore law firms. She has experience in litigation and intellectual property, and her practices focuses on trademarks prosecution and litigation, as well as commercial law. 

Admissions: Waiting Admission – Member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Singapore since 2026.

Memberships: 

Education: Law LLB from National University of Singapore– 2024

Languages: English, Chinese.

Liangshu Huang

Patent Associate

Intellectual Property, Patents, Litigation Support

Bio: Mr. Huang joined Agmon Law after working in an international patent law firm in Singapore. Mr. Huang assists with patent related drafting and prosecution including in the fields of medical devices, mechanical, biotech, software related inventions, CRI, physics, and defense. Mr. Huang brings to the team the experience and precision required in the field of patents. 

Education: Graduate Certificate in Intellectual Property Law, National University of Singapore (2015-2016)

MRES in Translational Medicine, Imperial College London (2009-2010)

Upper 2nd Class Honors in Biomedical Sciences, University of Bradford (2006-2008)

Languages: English, Chinese and Malay.

Jonathan Agmon

Founder & Director

Intellectual Property, Commercial, M&A, Litigation

Bio: With thirty over years of experience Jonathan specializes in intellectual property, commercial law and litigation. Jonathan established Agmon Law in 2025 after 25 years with Soroker Agmon Nordman, which he co-founded. He is a technologist-turned-lawyer and has represented numerous companies over the years. Aside from prosecution and transactional work, Jonathan also handles contentious matters such as oppositions and cancellations proceedings, and acts both as counsel and arbitrator in litigation, mediations and arbitration. His technology background is in computing and he still codes today having coded some of the Firm’s systems. 

Admissions: Foreign Registered Lawyer (Singapore) – 2016; Attorney and Counselor at Law (New York, United States) – 1996; Advocate, (Israel) – 1995

U.S. District Court, Southern and Northern District of New York; United States Court of Federal Claims.

Memberships: Member of CIArb; Internet Committee at ECTA – European Communities Trademark Association; APAA, INTA (Pro Bono Comittee); Domain Name Panelist (WIPO, FORUM, ADNDRC (HK), ISOC-IL, MFSD)

Education: Master of Laws (LL.M. Intellectual Property), George Washington University Law School – 1996; Bachelor of Laws (LL.B. Hons.), University of East London – 1993; Beijing Languages University: Chinese (Mandarin) – 2009

Languages: English, Hebrew, Chinese-Mandarin (Work in progress), Japanese (working on it…)