United Airlines obtains injunction against complaint website
United Airlines has won a dispute against a Canadian professor who operates a website that catalogued complaints against the airline.
A judge in Canada’s Federal Court found that the website, untied.com, had violated United’s trademarks and copyright on Friday, June 23.
Justice Michael Phelan granted United an injunction, preventing Jeremy Cooperstock, who runs the website, from using the airline’s IP.
United owns a number of trademarks in Canada, including the ‘United’ word mark (Canada trademark number TMA204,456); ‘United Airlines’ (Canada number TMA367,179); and the ‘Globe design’ logo (Canada number TMA492,886).
It also claimed copyright with respect to two logos: the ‘United logotype’ and the ‘Globe design’.
Cooperstock registered and launched his website in 1997. According to the judgment, the professor chose the domain name untied.com to “highlight the disconnection and disorganisation that he perceived in the company”.
Phelan added that in 2011, Cooperstock redesigned the website. New logos, including an ‘Untied’ logo with evenly spaced capital letters and a globe logo covered with a frown, were featured.
United contacted Cooperstock three times throughout 2012, requesting changes be made to the appearance of the website.
The dispute eventually found itself at Canada’s Federal Court, where Phelan found that Cooperstock had infringed the trademarks and copyright.
“Untied.com is clearly designed to evoke the general appearance of the United website, including the trademarks,” said Phelan.
Cooperstock may retain the use of the domain, ruled the court, although this must not be in association with the same services as those provided by United.
The parties were directed to submit reports to begin negotiating the terms of the injunction within 45 days.
Cooperstock said: “Keeping in mind the position argued by United, that one of its ‘services’ is dealing with passenger complaints, this would mean that the injunction would prevent untied.com from existing as a site hosting passenger complaints against United.”
He added that he would appeal to Canada’s Federal Court of Appeal.
A spokesperson for United said the company was "pleased with the court’s decision" and had always maintained that Cooperstock "should be able to voice his opinions".
They added: "Our case was to protect United customers and avoid confusion by asking him to not use our IP on his website and related channels."
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox
Today’s top stories:
IP Europe hands innovation manifesto to European Commission
WilmerHale boosts IP practice with two Freshfields partners
Tour de France winner wins restraining order in domain dispute
WIPR webinar: L’Occitane and Abbott discuss IP recordals
