Volume II

Issue : 2: January 22, 2004

• U.S. Court of Appeals Finds Trade-mark Rights May Limit "Keyed" Internet Searches
• Canadian Race Track First to Offer Online Gambling
• Microsoft Still on the Hook in EOLAS Patent Battle
• USPTO Releases List of Top Ten Patent Recipients for 2003
• U.S. Court of Appeals Rules that "Lawoffices" is Not Entitled to Trademark Protection
• VoIP: Level 3 Files Petition Seeking Exemption - FCC Chair Opposes Application of Existing Regulation - FBI Seeks Ability to Intercept Conversions - Bangladesh Telecom Breaks Law
• Canadian Firm Required to Pay Redress for Misleading Domain Name Marketing
• Copyright Ruling Appealed by Industry Groups - CRIA Launching Lawsuits Against File Swappers
• US-Court-of-Appeals-Dismisses-Honeywells-Attempt-to-Utilize-Trademark-Protection-in-Expired-Patent-Case
• Canadian Consumer Ministers Approve E-Commerce Code

Home > Volume II > Issue 2: January 22, 2004 > Canadian Firm Required to Pay Redress for Misleading Domain Name Marketing

Canadian Firm Required to Pay Redress for Misleading Domain Name Marketing

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has asked a District Federal Court to give effect to a stipulated final order, requiring a Canadian company, Domain Registry of America, Inc. (DRA), to pay redress to consumers and to stop making misrepresentations in the marketing of its domain name registration services.

DRA had sent out a direct email to U.S. consumers, soliciting them to transfer their domain name registrations from their current Internet domain name registrar to eNom, Inc. (a company for which DRA resells domain name registration services). The solicitations told consumers that their domain name registration was about to expire and, according to the FTC, misled consumers into thinking they were renewing their registrations with their current registrar. FCT also alleges that DRA did not disclose to consumers that it would charge a $4.50 processing fee for any transfer requests that were not completed and that DRA violated the Truth in Lending Act by not attending to refunds in a timely manner.

The stipulated order bars DRA from making any further false or misleading representations and from failing to clearly disclose any cancellation or processing limitations and/or fees. It requires DRA to comply with the Truth in Lending Act and requires DRA to comply with specific terms of the order, such as maintaining records for four years. DRA was also required to provide a full refund to consumers who cancelled a transfer request and was required to give current customers, who had acquired but had not renewed their registrations yet, the opportunity to transfer their registration and to pay $6 per consumer to defray the costs of the transfer.

For additional information, visit:
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2003/12/domainreg.htm