Satirical website did not violate US trademark laws, US judge rules

US District Court judge Dale Kimball dismissed a claim by Koch Industries that a spoof page published by Youth for Climate Truth infringed its trade mark rights.

"Koch lacks any evidence or plausible theory as to how [Youth for Climate Truth] could have profited commercially from an anonymous spoof website that sold no products and solicited no donations, that was disclosed only to reporters, and that was only online for a matter of hours," the judge ruled.

"[Youth for Climate Truth's] speech proposed no commercial transaction. Instead, it sought to draw public attention to Koch’s controversial stance on a political issue. Koch’s trademark and unfair-competition claims, therefore, fall outside the scope of [US trademark law] and are foreclosed by [US trademark laws'] commercial-use requirement," the US District Court judge ruled (18-page / 133KB PDF).

The court also dismissed Koch's claims of trade mark infringement and unfair competition under Utah common law on the basis that what Youth for Climate Truth had done had not been for commercial benefit.

Koch had also argued that Youth for Climate Truth's actions had violated the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA). ACPA was set up to “target a narrow class of cyber-squatters consisting of those who have the bad faith intent to profit, and not to tread on the rights of those with any other motives,” the Act says.

"In the absence of such a profit motive ... the ACPA does not apply," the judge said.

The climate change activists from Youth for Climate Truth had created a website, kochinc.com, that Koch said imitated its own site, kochind.com.

Youth for Climate Truth created a fake press release and added a link to the fake site. The press release appeared to detail a reversal of Koch's opinion on climate change. Koch's real website often carries political statements, the ruling said.

Koch had argued that the confusion caused by the fake website and press release meant the activists' behaviour amounted to commercial speech, which can be protected under US trade mark law. The company argued that the site constituted trade mark infringement and unfair competition, but the judge ruled that what the activists had said did not constitute commercial speech.

Koch claimed that Youth for Climate Truth violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) when it set up the fake website. The CFAA allows companies to take civil action for the loss or damage caused by computer hacking. The law imposes a criminal and civil responsibility on a hacker who accesses a computer "without authorisation or exceeds authorised access," the CFAA says.

The activists also acted without the company's authorisation to set up the site, which was inconsistent with the firm's terms of use, Koch had argued.

Koch's argument was dismissed because Youth for Climate Truth had not entered into a contractual agreement to bind them to either the terms of CFAA or Koch's terms of use, the judge ruled.

"The court ... concludes that Koch has not alleged a plausible claim that [Youth for Climate Truth] engaged in unauthorised access of a protected computer system, manifested assent to the Terms of Use on Koch’s website, or even that the website provided any method by which consent could be manifested. Koch’s failure to articulate any plausible theory on these points demonstrates that its CFAA and breach of contract claims cannot survive a motion to dismiss," the judge said.

The court ruling said that prominent publications such as the New York Times and Economist had published stories about the fake climate change statements and had identified the hoax behind it.

Youth for Climate Truth had reported that Koch would withdraw funding to organisations “whose positions on climate change could jeopardize America’s continued global competitiveness in the energy and chemical sectors.”

Technology law news is also available from Bootlaw, a free resource for technology start-ups, with regular events hosted by Pinsent Masons.