DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION ALONE IS ENOUGH TO INVOKE IN REM PROVISION Jack in the Box Inc. v. jackinthebox.org | Secondary Sources | Westlaw

DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION ALONE IS ENOUGH TO INVOKE IN REM PROVISION Jack in the Box Inc. v. jackinthebox.org | Secondary Sources | Westlaw

View on Westlaw or start a FREE TRIAL today, DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION ALONE IS ENOUGH TO INVOKE IN REM PROVISION Jack in the Box Inc. v. jackinthebox.org, Secondary Sources
Skip Page Header

DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION ALONE IS ENOUGH TO INVOKE IN REM PROVISION Jack in the Box Inc. v. jackinthebox.org

18 No. 21 ANCOILR 7Andrews Computer & Online Industry Litigation Reporter (Approx. 2 pages)

DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION ALONE IS ENOUGH TO INVOKE IN REM PROVISION Jack in the Box Inc. v. jackinthebox.org

18 No. 21 ANCOILR 7Andrews Computer & Online Industry Litigation Reporter (Approx. 2 pages)

18 No. 21 Andrews Computer & Online Indus. Litig. Rep. 7
Andrews Computer & Online Industry Litigation Reporter
July 3, 2001
Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act
Copyright (c) 2001 Andrews Publications

DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION ALONE IS ENOUGH TO INVOKE IN REM PROVISION

Jack in the Box Inc. v. jackinthebox.org

The act of registering an Internet domain name is, by itself, sufficient to invoke the in rem provision of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, a federal judge in Alexandria, Va., has ruled, ordering the transfer of the jackinthebox.net...
End of Document© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.