Understanding the Terms of Cyber Piracy

Understanding the Terms of Cyber Piracy

 

Cyber Piracy is an umbrella term for online deceptive practices on the web that include:

 

Cybersquatting

Cybersquatting is defined as registering, trafficking in, or using domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to trademarks with the bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of the trademarks.

 

Cybersquatters fall into a variety of categories and engage in cybersquatting for a variety of reasons which range from greed, to political activism, to malevolence or innocent mistake. 

 

Sometimes cybersquatters believe they have done nothing wrong because they are using only a variation of a trademark; because they believe that infringing behavior is legal on the Internet, or because they don't acknowledge proprietary rights on the Internet.  However, cybersquatters may also hold domain names for ransom, use them for infringing purposes or use them for more nefarious purposes.

 

A cybersquatter may offer a domain to the person or company who owns a trademark contained within the name at an inflated price, an act which some deem to be extortion. He or she may put up derogatory remarks about the person or company the domain is meant to represent in an effort to encourage the subject to buy the domain from them. Often cybersquatters wait for a registered domain name to expire, then register and place derogatory information on the site. Read about what happened to the Center for Arkansas Legal Services.

Deceptive Ad-Words
Another aspect of cyber piracy involves false advertising and deceptive trade practices. Each of the major search engines -- Google, Yahoo and MSN -- sell ad-words as a way for companies and organizations to advertise their products via their websites. When a user searches those words, the search engine prominently displays sites that have purchased particular ad-words. Often the title of the link in the search engine includes the words the person searched for such as “Pine Tree Legal Assistance” or “Vermont Legal Aid”.

 

For sophisticated web users, these “sponsored links” are identifiable. However, for a person new to online searching or a person vunerable to enticement by language promising free or low cost legal service, these advertisements can be extremely confusing – and ultimately, costly if pursued.

Search Engine Optimization

Search Engine Optimization

Search engine optimization (SEO) is the process of improving the volume and quality of traffic to a web site from search engines. Internet users conduct over 625 million searches every day on search engines such as Google, MSN, or Yahoo and a web site’s position in search results dramatically effects whether users find it.

To achieve a higher rank in the search results, SEO considers how search algorithms work and what people search for. SEO efforts may involve a site's coding, presentation, and structure, as well as fixing problems that could prevent search engine indexing programs from fully spidering a site.

For legal aid programs, using SEO to improve their web site’s page rank can be a significant tool in disarming cyber piracy efforts.

The following are concrete suggestions about how to optimize your own website. Experts suggest focusing on your home page and then branching out to apply the same principles to other pages on your site. These efforts should improve your page ranking, but your position in the search engine results will fluctuate and be influenced by several factors, including other websites competing for similar search terms.

Keywords

Knowing the search terms (or “keywords”) your potential visitors are searching for is crucial to attracting them to your site.

• Try to come up with as many possible keywords as you can related to the services you offer. Include your organization's name and location in your keywords list. Be as specific as possible.
• Check the popularity of your choices using an online keyword database. A very popular free database is Yahoo’s keyword tool http://inventory.overture.com.
• Narrow down your list to a few keywords including your organization's name, location, and your main subject area.

Website Optimization

Website optimization is the process of modifying your website to include your selected keywords in the content and HTML code of the website.

• Include a paragraph for each of your top keywords.
• Make sure your keyword phrases for each page appear in the HTML title tag. Limit the title to about 70 characters and 2-3 keyword phrases.
• Use one or more explanatory headings on each page. In HTML, these are indicated by the tags H1, H2, H3, etc. Include relevant keywords in heading tags for content sections.
• Give specific, relevant filenames to all webpages, images, and navigation links.
• Be sure that every single page on your website is linked from your navigation structure, so that no pages are “orphaned”.

Link Building

Link building is the process of getting other websites to link to yours, which generates direct traffic while increasing your search engine rankings.

• Encourage inbound links from affiliates.
• Write media (press) releases and submit them to distribution and syndication services.
• Submit your website to web directories.
• Continually search out and find new sources of links to your website.

Analytics

Website Analytics programs generate statistical reports that show how people find and use your website.

• Tracking the “hits”, “visits”, “repeat visitors”, “page views”, “referrers”, and “keywords” to identify new search keywords and sources of web site traffic will enable you to continually improve SEO.

This material was compiled by Sujay Vennam from the following sources:

Grassroot.org's Introduction to SEO

9 Search Engine Ranking Essentials For Nonprofits

Wikipedia on Search Engine Optimization

Dave Chakrabarti on Nonprofit SEO

Registering Your Trademark - A Primer

by Milbank & Tweed and Dickstein and Shapiro, June 2007.

This primer (PDF) and accompanying questionnaire (PDF) have been provided to help legal aid organizations navigate the trademark process. They are a must-read for programs interested in receiving pro bono assistance from these law firms in trademark applications. See also Common Law Trademarks.

 

OVERVIEW

Trademark law governs the use of trademarks by individuals and legal entities to identify their goods or services and to distinguish those goods or services from those sold or provided by others.

 

What is a service mark?
A service mark is a type of trademark which uses words, phrases, symbols or designs to identify and distinguish the source of a service from those of other services.

For example, the service mark “Legal Aid Society of Sam and Jane County” would distinguish services provided by the legal aid society from others providing similar legal services.

 

What is trademark infringement?
A trademark is infringed when some entity other than the owner of the mark another uses the same or similar mark in a way that is likely to cause confusion as to the source or sponsorship of the goods or services involved.

For example, if another legal services provider used the mark of Legal Aid Society of Sam and Jane County to offer legal services at a cost, the use might be (probably is) an infringement.

 

TRADEMARK REGISTRATION

What is trademark registration?
Registration is the process of formally recording your trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”).

Is registration of a trademark required?
No. Common law trademark rights are established when a mark is used in commerce to identify one’s goods or services. However, common law trademark protection is much more limited than the statutory protections afforded to registered trademarks.

Why should I register a trademark?
Registering a trademark on the Principal Register of the PTO provides the greatest protection for your trademark.

Registration on the Principal Register is available for trademarks that are distinctive.

Registration on the Principal Register provides several important benefits including:

• The public, including other legal service providers, is deemed to have been notified of your ownership of the mark;

• If another entity challenges your use of the trademark, you will be presumed to be the owner of the mark with sole rights to its use, and the challenger will have the burden of proving that you do not have the right to use the mark; and
• If any other legal service organization is using (infringing) your trademark, you may bring a legal action in federal court to stop the infringement.

If a trademark is not eligible for registration on the Principal Register, for example, if it is not distinctive (e.g., it is descriptive), it may be registered on the Supplemental Register, which provides some but not all of the protections of marks registered on the Principal Register.

Once a mark becomes distinctive, it can be re-registered on the Principal Register.

When can I use the trademark symbols “SM” or ®?
Any time you claim rights to a mark, you may use the “SM” (service mark) designation to alert the public to your claim, regardless of whether you have filed an application with the PTO. You may use the federal registration symbol “®” only after the PTO registers your mark.

Before the trademark is registered by the PTO: Legal Aid Society of Sam and Jane County SM.

After the trademark has been registered by the PTO: Legal Aid Society of Sam and Jane County ®.

 

THE APPLICATION PROCESS

What does the trademark registration process involve?
To register a trademark, you must file an application for trademark registration with the PTO. The application may be filed electronically using the PTO Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), available at http://www.uspto.gov/teas/index.html, or by paper application through the PTO.

Please Note: Paper applications are not processed as quickly as those submitted electronically and have a different fee schedule than electronic applications.

 

Do I have to have an attorney file the application?
You do not have to use an attorney to file a trademark application. Through an arrangement with SNAP, a group of law firms informally called the Pro Bono Consortium have agreed to provide advice and assistance to you in completing and filing a trademark application and responding to requests for additional information from the PTO. The services of the attorneys involved in the Pro Bono Consortium will be provided at no cost to you, however the application filing fees and post-registration maintenance fees and obligations described below will be your responsibility.

 

THE APPLICATION – WHAT YOU MUST INCLUDE

Name and type of entity of the Legal Aid Society
The application must be filed in the name of the Legal Aid Society, which is the owner of the mark.

Address for Correspondence
You must provide an address where the PTO can send communications concerning the application. If you use the services of our Pro Bono Consortium, communications relating to the application will be sent to your attorney during the application process.

Depiction of the Mark (The Drawing)
The “Mark” will consist of each Legal Aid Society’s name or logo.

A drawing may be filed as either

• A standard character drawing in which all letters and words in the mark are depicted in Latin characters; all numerals in the mark are depicted in Roman or Arabic numerals; the mark includes only common punctuation marks; and the mark does not include a design element.

  Note: A standard character drawing must include a statement that the mark presented in standard character format without claim to any particular font style, size or color.

• A stylized or special form drawing which includes a design element or logo.

Note: Once the drawing is filed, A MATERIAL CHANGE TO THE MARK IS NOT ALLOWED.

Classification of Services
The Pro Bono Consortium has determined that the appropriate classification for the services you provide is “International Class 45: Legal Services,” which includes all legal services rendered by others to meet the needs of individuals, including attorney services.

 

Basis for Filing
Applications are based on the current use of the trademark in commerce, or the intent to use the trademark in commerce in the future. A “use in commerce” based application must include a sworn statement (declaration) that the trademark is in use in commerce, listing the date of the first use of the mark anywhere and the date of first use of the mark in commerce, and signed by the Executive Director (or other authorized person) on behalf of the Legal Aid Society.

 

Specimen
A specimen is an actual example of how the name of the Legal Aid Society is used in connection with the provision of free, civil legal services to low-income persons.

For example, you can submit promotional brochures, newspaper clippings, website screen shots, or fundraising materials displaying the name or logo of the Legal Aid Society and describing the legal services.

 

Application Filing Fee

In 2007, Application Filing Fees are $325 for TEAS Applications and $375 for Paper Applications.

Note: If the application meets the minimum filing requirements and is given a filing date, the application filing fee cannot be refunded.

 

Signature

Only persons properly authorized to sign on behalf of the Legal Aid Society - such as the Executive Director of the Legal Aid Society - may sign the application.

REVIEW AND EXAMINATION BY THE PTO

Review of the Application
Once the PTO determines that the minimum filing requirements are met, your application is forwarded to an Examining Attorney who will determine if the application complies with all applicable rules and statutes and includes all required fees.

Note: This may take several months.

 

Results of the Examination
Deficient or Refused Applications
If the Examining Attorney determines that the application is deficient or the mark should not be registered, the Examining Attorney will issue an Office Action to you or, if you use the Pro Bono Consortium, to your attorney explaining the substantive reasons for refusal, and any technical or procedural deficiencies in the application.

If an Office Action is issued, your response is required within six months of the mailing date, or the application will be declared abandoned.

If your response to the Office Action does not overcome all objections, the Examining Attorney will issue a final refusal.
You may appeal a final refusal, for an additional fee, to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

If you use the Pro Bono Consortium, your attorney will prepare the response to the Office Action for you. The attorney may need additional materials from you. You should respond to any requests for additional materials promptly to avoid abandonment of your application.

 

Approved Applications
If the Examining Attorney raises no objections to registration, or the all objections raised in the Office Action are overcome, the mark will be approved for publication in the Official Gazette.

After publication, any party who believes that it may be damaged by registration of the mark has 30 days from the date of publication to file an opposition to registration or to request an extension of time to oppose.

If the mark is published based on use in commerce, and no opposition is filed, the mark will register and a registration certificate will be issued by the PTO about 3-4 months after the publication date.

 

Declaration of Use

Between the 5th and 6th years following registration you must file a Declaration of Use with the PTO

Cost: $100 (for each class of services)

Declaration of Incontestability

Any time after the 5th year following registration, you may file a Declaration of Incontestability; typically, this optional document is filed with the Declaration of Use.

Cost: $200 (for each class of services)

Renewal Application
Federal trademarks are issued for 10 years and may be renewed for additional 10-year periods. Renewal applications are filed between the 9th and 10th years following registration (or renewal).

Cost: $500 (for each class of services)

 

If you use the Pro Bono Consortium, your attorney will prepare a package for you when your mark is registered that will include your PTO registration certificate, as well as a schedule of when the Declaration of Use, Declaration of Incontestability and Renewal Application should be filed.

 

Please bear in mind, however, that these post-registration maintenance obligations are the obligations of the Legal Aid Society. The Pro Bono Consortium will not provide any services or assistance in connection with post-registration maintenance obligations and will not be responsible for reminding you of the filing dates.

 

More information is available from the Post Registration Division, (571) 272-9500.

Take Action: Defend Your Name

Defend your Name -- Trademark your organization. Establishing a trademark provides legal aid organizations with key tools that they can use to combat cyber piracy. Trademarks can be registered online at the US Patent and Trademark Office’s Trademark Electronic Application System for a fee of $335. Having a federally registered trademark gives legal aid groups several remedies to curtail domain parking or cyber squatting, and offers leverage in dealing with deceptive advertisers and search engines companies. Even if it has not registered a federal trademark, however, a legal aid organization may be entitled to common-law protection.

 

Read More: Primer in Trademarking (login required). Find out how to receive pro bono assistance with your trademark application: Pro Bono Counsel Offers Trademark Assistance.

Take Action: Remedies for Domain Name Disputes

Remedies for Domain Name Disputes

 

a. Request Voluntary Transfer -- The first line of defense in domain parking or cyber squatting disputes is to request voluntary transfer of the offending domain name from its owners. Voluntary transfer, or even buying the owner out, may be the easiest and cheapest solution.

 

b. ICANN Arbitration -- If direct contact with the owner of the site does not resolve the problem, legal aid groups have two potential avenues for recourse: they may initiate a Uniform Dispute Resolution Proceeding with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) or file suit in Federal Court under the Anti-Cyber Squatting Consumer Protection Act.

 

c. Uniform Dispute Resolution Proceedings -- Over the last several years, the Uniform Dispute Resolution Proceeding (UDRP) has become a fast and relatively inexpensive remedy for disputes over domain names. Fees typically range from $1,000 to $5000 depending on the number of domain names being challenged and number of panelists presiding over the judgment.

Under this process, the legal aid group files a complaint with a UDRP provider. The provider forwards it to the relevant domain name registrar and the owner of the domain name, and establishes a panel to render a decision about the proceeding within 14 days. The owner has 20 days from the beginning of the proceeding to file a response to the complaint. Special circumstances may extend the proceeding, but disputes are typically resolved by 60 days after the initial complaint.

The panel will order transfer of the offending domain name if it is confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights, if the owner has no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the domain name, and if the domain name has been registered in bad faith. Evidence of bad faith includes circumstances indicating that:

• the owner has registered or acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of your documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name, or

• the owner has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to the web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location.

A more in-depth discussion of the UDRP process and evidence of bad faith may be found in Using ICANN’s UDRP, a seminar taught at Harvard Law School’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society between April 21 and April 28, 2000.)

 

d. Litigation: The Anti-Cyber Squatting Consumer Protection Act
Filing suit under the ACPA is much more expensive and potentially more time consuming than resolving a dispute through ICANN’s UDRP. A legal aid organization should pursue action under the ACPA if it wants to seek remedies over and above the cancellation or transfer of a domain name or it anticipates that a cyber squatter will challenge a UDRP ruling in court.

If found in favor of the plaintiff, an ACPA suit can result in

• the cancellation of a domain name or the transfer of that name to the owner of the trademark

• transfer of the defendant’s profits and payment of actual damages, costs and attorney’s fees, or
• the payment of treble damages.

In lieu of actual damages, the plaintiffs may elect for statutory damages of between $1,000 and $100,000 per domain name (15 U.S.C. § 1117(d)).

 

Plaintiffs may bring ACPA suit even if the defendant cannot be found, by filing an “in rem” suit against the domain name. This kind of suit can result in the cancellation or transfer of the domain, but monetary damages are not available in the absence of a defendant. Because an “in rem” suit provides the same remedies as a UDRP action, it may be easier and less expensive to pursue the latter.

 

e. Pursue Disciplinary Action through a Bar Association.

In cases where an entity has inappropriately used your domain name to lead users to an individual lawyer or a law firm, your organization may be able to pursue disciplinary action against that lawyer or firm through their state bar. Bar associations have ethical rules that forbid lawyers from benefiting when third parties engage in activity on their behalf that the lawyer could not engage in directly. For example:

• FL Rule 4-7.10(b) a lawyer who accepts referrals from a lawyer referral service is responsible for ensuring that any advertisements used by the service comply with the requirements of the Rules.

• TX 7. 4 (p) a lawyer who advertises in the public media as part of an advertising cooperative or venture shall be individually responsible for: (1) ensuring that each advertisement does not violate this Rule...
• ABA Model Rule 8.4 (a) it is professional misconduct to violate the Rules through the acts of another.

State ethics opinions have clarified that these rules apply to Internet advertising even when the Internet is not specifically mentioned in the rule.

Potential breaches to pursue include:

• ABA Model Rule 7.5 (a): A trade name may be used by a lawyer in private practice if it does not imply a connection with a public or charitable legal services organization.

• ABA Model Rule 7.1: A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services… (Most states prohibit the creation of “unjustified expectations” and “unsubstantiated comparisons”)

• ABA Model Rule 7.2 (b): A lawyer shall not give anything of value for the recommendation of the lawyer’s services, except for the reasonable costs of advertising or the usual changes of a state-qualified or non-profit lawyer referral service or legal service plan. (Other 7.2 limitations may also apply. Look at the cumulative effect for multi-state entities - disclaimers, limits on dramatizations, limits on stock photos, retention/filing/ screening requirements.)
• ABA Model Rules 8.4 (c) and (d) prohibit deception or misrepresentation and conduct detrimental to the legal profession.

Possible outcomes from filing a complaint may include a cease and desist letter or "Ask Gary" style sanctions, in which lawyers may face disciplinary action because they acquired clients through advertising that is prohibited.

 

[Material in section e has been extracted from Will Hornsby's presentation, "Who's Got Your Name?" which was delivered at the NLADA Annual Meeting on November 8, 2007. The PowerPoint may be found here.]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Take Action: Dealing with Search Engine Results

Dealing with Search Engine Results

a. Defensive measures: Trademarks are also useful in the effort to deal with deceptive advertising in search engine “sponsored links.” Search engines often use broad or expanded matching to bundle related keywords and optimize the appearance of sponsored results for a variety of related searches. As a result, a search for Pepsi may return sponsored ads for Coca Cola, and similarly, a search for legal aid (or a specific legal aid organization) may return ads for for-profit sites.

Case law is unclear about whether search engines are liable for competitive or deceptive keywords in sponsored results, but some courts have held that diverting consumers through keyword searches may result in liability under the doctrine of Initial Interest Confusion (IIC).

In Brookfield Communications, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp., the Ninth Circuit defined IIC as “the use of another’s trademark in a manner calculated to capture initial consumer attention, even though no actual sale is finally completed as a result of the confusion.” A recent district court criticized Brookfield’s analysis, agreeing that keyword advertising is a “use in commerce,” but suggesting that use of keyword-triggered ads and metatags cannot confuse consumers if the ultimate search results do not display plaintiff’s trademarks.

In recent years, Yahoo! and Google have responded to controversy about the use of trademarks in ads by establishing trademark complaint procedures. Each promises to remove or modify the advertiser’s listing to resolve the dispute.

 

b. Affirmative Steps: Search Engine Optimization. If clients know about your website and know how to distinguish it from other sites, these problems can be overcome. By developing techniques that market your website name and logo to your client community, you establish a mental mark with your site that will prevent confusion. Additionally, you can take on optimizing your web site's ability to be appropriately placed when clients search for your site or for legal help. If your website is at the top of the page, a sponsored link, and clearly identified, confusion is mitigated. Read more about Search Engine Optimization strategies.

Common Law Trademarks (and its Case Law)

A legal aid organization may be entitled to common-law protection even if it has not registered a federal trademark. Common-law trademark claims apply similar principles and case law to the Lanham Act, so that state and federal courts often rely upon each other’s cases, providing a “common reservoir” of trademark precedent.

Common law protection, however, is often limited to the geographic area in which the mark is used, and the plaintiff in a common law protection suit must prove it is entitled to exclusive use of its trademark. Unregistered common-law marks are protected locally even if someone later federally registers the mark.

 

According to case law:

• A party may obtain a common-law trademark or service mark on any terms it uses in commerce, though absent federal registration, common-law status generally limits its protection the geographic area in which the term was used. Accordingly, to bring a claim under the Lanham Act, federal registration is not required, “but the scope of any common law rights vindicated would be limited to areas where the mark is in use.”

  Gen. Healthcare Ltd. v. Qashat, 364 F.3d 332, 336 n.7 (1st Cir. 2004) (citing United Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co., 248 U.S. 90, 97-98 (1918), which clarifies that trademark rights are confined to territories of use).

• Trademark rights may arise under either the Lanham Act or under common law, but in either circumstance, the right is conditioned upon use in commerce.

  Gen. Healthcare Ltd. v. Qashat, 364 F.3d 332, 335 (1st Cir. 2004) (citing United Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co., 248 U.S. 90, 97 (1918), which establishes that “the right to a particular mark grows out of its use, not its mere adoption”)

• Establishing use in commerce for common-law marks is similar to that of registered marks.

  Gen. Healthcare, 364 F.3d at 336 n.6 (citing Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc., 505 U.S. 763, 768 (1992), which asserts that “[T]he general principles qualifying a mark for registration under the Lanham Act are for the most part applicable in determining whether an unregistered mark is entitled to protection.”)

• Justice Stevens has noted that the congressional purpose of the Lanham Act was to bring consistency to the myriad of common-law trademark decisions.

  Two Pesos v. Taco Cabana, 505 U.S. 763, 782 (1992) (Stevens, J., concurring in result) (citing H. R. Rep. No. 944, 76th Cong., 1st Sess., 4 (1939))

• Absent federal registration, a party seeking to establish a common-law trademark or service mark protection bears the burden of proving that it is entitled to exclusive use of the mark.

  Keebler Co. v. Rovira Biscuit Corp., 624 F.2d 366, 376 (1st Cir. 1980).

• It must prove that “the primary significance of the term in the minds of the consuming public is not the product but the producer.”

  Keebler Co., 624 F.2d at 376 (quoting Kellogg Co. v. Nat’l Biscuit Co., 305 U.S. 111, 118 (1938)).

• To prevail under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, a plaintiff must establish that the mark it seeks to protect has become “so associated with its goods that the use of the (mark) by another company constitutes a representation that its goods come from the same source.”

  Keebler Co., 624 F.2d at 376 (quoting Joshua Meier Co. v. Albany Novelty Mfg. Co., 236 F.2d 144 (2d Cir. 1956)).

• A common-law mark is only effective in geographic areas where it has a presence. As Professor McCarthy stated in his treatise, “under common law, absent appropriate federal legislation, the national senior user of a mark cannot oust a geographically remote good-faith user who has used the mark first in a remote trade area.”

  McCarthy on Trademarks § 26:4 at 26-9; see Ammon & Person v. Narragansett Dairy Co., 262 F. 880 (1st Cir. 1919); Raxton Corp. v. Anania Assoc., Inc., 635 F.2d 924 (1st Cir. 1980)).

 

The PTLA Experience & LegalMatch Settlement

In 2005, Pine Tree Legal Assistance received a phone call from a client who asked why they were selling divorce forms on their website. Through this conversation PTLA learned the client had gone to www.pinetreelegal.com not the actual Pine Tree site, www.ptla.org. PTLA staff also discovered that not only did the website use the organization’s name, but that the site also had reviewed the content on PTLA’s site. The “fake site” contained links with the same topics as PTLA’s site. However, these links took users to websites that sell interactive divorce forms, eviction packets as well as lawyer referral services, and child support collection services.

 

In March 2006, Pine Tree Legal Assistance (PTLA) sued the San Francisco business in federal court in Portland, Maine alleging trademark infringement, unfair and deceptive trade practices, and false advertisement. PTLA is represented pro bono by two firms: Bernstein Shur, Sawyer and Nelson in Portland Maine and Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, a Minneapolis-based firm. On April 3, 2006, PTLA and LegalMatch settled the lawsuit amicably. LegalMatch agreed, as part of this settlement, to work with major search engines to exclude the term “legal aid” in any advertising, as well as the specific names of any nonprofit legal services program names.

 

The LegalMatch settlement was a critical step in beginning to resolve deceptive ad-words. Unfortunately there are other companies utilizing the term “legal aid” and legal aid organization names in online advertising. Often these are national companies and therefore a nationally organized strategy is needed to address this issue in an effective way that benefits legal aid programs across the country.

 

For details of the LegalMatch settlement see the full press release on the PTLA website. PDF copies of the complaint and settlement are attached below.

 

Robert Ambrogi's covered the LegalMatch case in his LawSites blog: March 4, 2006, April 3, 2006, April 4, 2006.