Author Question: Express ratification creating an agency by the principal occurs when the principal: a. fails to ... (Read 148 times)

nevelica · **on:** Jun 24, 2018

Express ratification creating an agency by the principal occurs when the principal:
a. fails to object to an agent's unauthorized activities
b. by action shows a clear intent to be bound by unauthorized acts of the agent c. accepts the benefits of an unauthorized agreement with a third party
d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other choices

Question 2

Domain Names. In 1999, Steve and Pierce Thumann and their father, Fred, created Spi-der Webs, Ltd., a partnership, to, according to Steve, develop Internet address names. Spider Webs registered nearly two thousand Internet domain names at an average cost of 70 each, including the names of cities, the names of buildings, names related to a business or trade (such as air conditioning or plumbing), and the names of famous companies. It offered many of the names for sale on its Web site and through eBay.com. Spider Webs registered the domain name ERNESTANDJULIOGALLO .COM in Spider Webs' name. E. & J. Gallo Winery filed a suit against Spider Webs, alleging, in part, violations of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Pro-tection Act (ACPA). Gallo asked the court for, among other things, statutory damages. Gallo also sought to have the domain name at issue transferred to Gallo. During the suit, Spider Webs published anticorporate articles and negative opinions about Gallo, as well as discussions of the suit and of the risks associated with alcohol use, at the URL ERNESTANDJULIOGALLO .COM. Should the court rule in Gallo's favor? Why or why not?

Pariscourtney · **Reply #1 on:** Jun 24, 2018

Answer to Question 1

b

Answer to Question 2

Domain names
The court granted Gallo a summary judgment and awarded 25,000 in statutory damages. The court enjoined the Thumanns from using the domain name ERNESTANDJULIOGALLO .COM and from registering any name that contains the word Gallo or the words Ernest and Julio in combination. Finally, the court ordered the Thumanns to transfer to Gallo ERNESTANDJULIOGALLO .COM. The court explained that Spider Webs' domain name is confusingly similar to Gallo's registered trademark. The ACPA lists nine factors as to whether a domain name was registered in bad faith Concluding that Spider Webs had acted in bad faith, the court pointed out that Gallo has a registered trademark in the name ERNEST & JULIO GALLO,' while Spider Webs has no intellectual property interest in the name . . . . Furthermore, the domain name . . . does not include the legal name of Spider Webs . . . or of its partners . . . . Spider Webs has never used the domain name in connection with the bona fide offering of any goods or services. It has, however, used the name to develop a web site on which it has made derogatory comments about the instant litigation and about alcohol. This use served only to disparage Gallo and diminish its goodwill. Also, Thumann's failure to seek advice from counsel prior to acquiring the domain name at issue as to whether it might be engaging in infringing conduct . . . supports a finding of bad faith.