簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 陳光合
Nattapong Suwan-in
論文名稱： 「第二人生」中商標侵權與淡化問題之研究
Research on Trademark Infringement and Dilution in the Second Life
指導教授： 陳曉慧
Hsiao-Hui Chen
口試委員: 林瑞珠
Rui-Zhu Lin
范建得
Jian-De Fan
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 管理學院 - 管理學院MBA
School of Management International (MBA)
論文出版年： 2010
畢業學年度： 98
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 135
中文關鍵詞： 商標法 、商標侵權 、商標淡化 、虛擬世界 、虛擬商標法 、第二人生 、第二人生的商標侵權 、第二人生的商標淡化
外文關鍵詞： Trademark Law, Trademark Infringement, Trademark Dilution, Virtual World, Virtual Trademark Law, Second Life, Trademark Infringement in Second Life, Trademark Dilution in Virtual World
相關次數： 點閱：186  下載：6 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 在虛擬世界科技為遊戲玩家與社群不斷創新的年代，於2003年誕生了「第二人生」。像「無盡的任務」或是「魔獸爭霸」這類遊戲，只是驅使玩家往更高級練功，「第二人生」則不再僅是線上遊戲，而提供了一個可將獲利轉換到真實生活的空間。根據調查，在2007年的5月，於「第二人生」的虛擬世界中，有超過16間的商店行銷法拉利跑車，最高售價為7.75美金；40家商店以約1.61美元販賣Rolex和Chanel的商品；甚至有50間商店以僅約0.75美元的低價販售Gucci、Prada、Ray Ban和Oakley的商品，然而，其中沒有一個商品是商標權人所擁有或經過授權，因此，「第二人生」已經引起嚴重的法律上爭議與社會的注意。目前「第二人生」已有超過11,500,000筆的交易，衍生的問題便是，現行商標法是否仍可適用，以及適於用來解決這些問題。

    本文選擇電話單詞（Phonewords）及網域名稱相關案例，觀察美國商標法對新興科技，使商標不再貼附於商品上，而是以電話號碼、網域名稱呈現時，如何因應，以討論商標法在「第二人生」中，將商標貼附於虛擬商品時之解釋適用。對此，本文區分三種情況，分別探討商標侵權及商標淡化二項問題。

    情況一是假設在現實世界商標受到商標法保護，而侵權行為發生於「第二人生」。情況二與三，則假設在虛擬世界中的商標，取得商標法的保護，而侵權行為則分別發生於現實世界（方案二）、虛擬世界（方案三）。研究結果發現，在三種情況下，都可能構成商標混淆誤認之虞，而成立商標侵權。就商標淡化而言，方案二和方案三中虛擬世界的商標權人，可能難以證明其商標為著名商標；而在方案一，現實世界的著名商標，在虛擬世界可認為仍屬著名商標。

    Second Life was developed back in 2003 when the virtual world technology was innovated for game users and social world wanderers. Whereby a game like EverQuest or the World of Warcraft inspires users to merely strive into a higher level, virtual world of Second Life is no longer a game online at present but in fact a stage of making profit, convertibly into real life. As it was observed by May 2007, there were more than 16 shops in Second Life advertised Ferrari cars, offered for sale for proximate US$ 7.75, Rolex and Chanel at 40 stores with the price offered averaging around US$ 1.61, as well as Gucci, Prada, Ray Ban and Oakley for various types of 3D at approximately 50 stores for the price much cheaper at US$ 0.75, while none is really owned or sponsored by actual trademark owners, Second Life has rendered serious legal disputes and public attention. With more than 11,500,000 transactions taken place in Second Life nowadays, the problem in consequence is how to say that the current trademark law is applicable and suitable to find legal solution(s).

    In this context of legal research, the author came to use analytical methodology by observing the trend and development of US Trademark Law in each period of Phonewords and Domain Name, and comparing to the modern world of Second Life. Thus, the technologies used in all three types of the periods are sharing a crux of theme in common, specifically the trademark use that is transformed into intangible, expressed in term of alphanumeric number, Domain Name, and virtual mark attached on Second Life products. The dispute is hence further discussed of its possible assumptions and applications that the US courts shall possibly rule, with three scenarios rendered in full, distinguishing our analysis of infringement and dilution into particular situation.

    Despite of the differences that the Scenario 1 is hypothesized that trademark protection is gained in real world and infringement is committed in Second Life, Scenario 2 and 3 are the flip side whereby trademark protection are gained in the virtual world though infringement is committed diversely (Infringement is done in real world for Scenario 2 and in the virtual world for Scenario 3), the results in final show similarly that consumers are likely to find confusion in constitution of infringement. Whilst for trademark dilution, virtual mark owners both for Scenario 2 and 3 seem to face difficulty for proof famousness of the marks, deviated from the Scenario 1 whereby famousness extension is expected to cross over to the virtual world.

    Table of Content Page Abstract I 摘要 II Acknowledgements III Table of Content IV Figure Index VI Table Index VI Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1.1 Game World, Virtual World, and the Second Life 1 1.2 Objectives of the Study 3 1.3 Research Methodology 4 1.4 Research Limitation 4 Chapter 2: Trademark Problems and Disputes over the Second Life: Virtually Real Commerce 6 Chapter 3: Trend and Expansion of the Trademark Law due to Technology Development: from Electronic World of Phonewords to Cyber World of Domain Name, and the Visual World of Second Life 8 3.1 Phonewords 10 3.1.1 Introduction to Phonewords 10 3.1.2 Disputes arisen from the use of Phonewords 12 3.1.3 Acquisition of Trademark Protection in Phonewords 13 3.1.3.1 By Actual or Legitimate Use of the Mark 14 3.1.3.2 By Registration of the Mark 20 3.1.4 Trademark Infringement in Phonewords 20 3.2 Domain Name 3.2.1 Introduction to Domain Name 29 29 3.2.2 Disputes arisen from the use of Domain Name 31 3.2.3 Acquisition of Trademark Protection in Domain Name 33 3.2.3.1 By Actual or Legitimate Use of the Mark 35 3.2.3.2 By Registration of the Mark 39 3.2.4 Trademark Infringement in Domain Name 3.2.5 Trademark Dilution in Domain Name 39 47 Chapter 4: Trademarks in a Post Modern World of Second Life: Possibility of Trademark Law Application in the Virtual World 54 4.1 The Use of Technology in connection with Goods/Services where Trademark Disputes have been raised: the Similarity of the Three Worlds 54 4.2 Trademark Law Application in the Second Life 56 4.2.1 Scenario 1: Acquired Trademark Protection in Real World, Enforcement is in Second Life 56 4.2.1.1 Trademark Protection 57 4.2.1.2 Trademark Infringement 58 4.2.1.3 Trademark Dilution 72 4.2.2 Scenario 3: Acquired Trademark Protection in Second Life, Enforcement is in Second Life 77 4.2.2.1 Trademark Protection 77 4.2.2.2 Trademark Infringement 78 4.2.2.3 Trademark Dilution 79 4.2.3 Scenario 2: Acquired Trademark Protection in Second Life, Enforcement is in Real World 79 4.2.3.1 Trademark Protection 80 4.2.3.2 Trademark Infringement 80 4.2.3.3 Trademark Dilution 83 4.3 Trademark Liability in the Second Life: A Responsibility to Trademark Owners 84 Chapter 5: Conclusion and Suggestions for Business/Enterprises in Legal Prospective 88 References 95 Appendix I: Domain Name Application 104 Appendix II: Top 20 Countries with the Highest Number of Internet Users 109 Appendix III: Second Life’s Terms of Service 111 Figure Index Page Figure 3: Trend and Expansion of the Trademark Law due to Technology Development 9 Figure 3.1: Telephone Keypad 10 Figure 4.1: The Use of Technology in connection with Goods/Services where Trademark Disputes have been raised 55 Figure 4.2.1-A: Example of Trademark Infringement in the Second Life 56 Figure 4.2.1-B: Example of Trademark Infringement in the Second Life 57 Figure 4.2.1-C: Example of Trademark Infringement in the Second Life 58 Figure 4.2.1.2-A: Outline of the Research Analysis and Discussion 62 Figure 4.2.1.2-B: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs 70 Figure 4.2.3.2: Harry Potter Zone, the Universal Studio (Orlando) Theme Park 82 Figure 5: Likelihood of Confusion Research Direction of the Scenario 1 and the Results displayed in Hierarchy Chart 91 Table Index Table 2: Three Possibly District Cases of Disputes over Second Life 6 Table 3.1.1: Components of the NANP Number Format 11 Table 4.2.1.2: Trademark Registration Table 64 Table 5: Summary Table of the Trademark Application in Second Life (Expected Results by July 2010) 89

    I. Books
    1. Chisum, D. S., and Jacobs, M. A. (1992) Understanding Intellectual Property, Times Mirror Books.
    2. Dreyfuss, R. C., and Kwall, R. R. (2004) Intellectual Property: Cases and Materials on Trademark, Thomson West.
    3. Duranske, B. T. (2008) Virtual Law, ABA Publishing.
    4. Freedman, R. (2008) How to Make Real Money in Second Life, McGrawHill.
    5. Hansen, H. (2006) U.S. Intellectual Property Law and Policy, Fordham University School of Law.
    6. Marshall, J. N. (1999) History of the Nice Agreement, Guide to the Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services, Oceana Publication, Inc.
    7. Marshall, J. N. (2000) Guide to the Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services, Oceana Publication, Inc.
    8. McCarthy, J. T. (1996) McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition, 4th Edition, West Group, St. Paul, MN, April.
    9. Merges, R. P., Menell, P.S., and Mark A. Lemley (2006) Intellectual Property in the New Technological Age, 4th Edition, ASPEN Publishers.
    10. Schechter, R. E. (1993) Intellectual Property, 3rd edition, West Publishing Co.
    II. Cases
    (i) American Law
    1. Abercrombie & Fitch Co. v. Hunting World, Inc., 537 F. 2d 4, 9 (2d Cir. 1976).
    2. Abraham Zion Corp. v. Lebow, 761 F. 2d 93, 104 (2d Cir. 1985).
    3. Actmedia, Inc. v. Active Media Int’l, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20814 (N.D. Ill. July 17, 1996).
    4. Am.Online, Inc. v. AT&T Corp., 243 F. 3d 812, 819 (4th Cir. 2001).
    5. American Airlines, Inc. v. A 1-800-A-M-E-R-I-C-A-N Corp., 622 F. Supp. 673 (N.D. Ill. 1985).
    6. AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F. 2d 341, 349 (9th Cir. 1979).
    7. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255, 106 S. Ct. 2505, 91 L. Ed. 2d 202 (1986).
    8. Anthony J. Degidio v. West Group Corporation, 355 F. 3d 506, 69 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1538 (6th Cir. 2004).
    9. Avery Dennison Corporation v. Sumpton, 51 U.S.P.Q. 3d 1801 (9th Cir. 1999).
    10. Boston Beer Co. v. Slesar Bros. Brewing Co., 9 F. 3d 175, 180 (1st Cir. 1993).
    11. Bragg v. Linden Research, Inc., 847 F. Supp. 2d 593 (E. D. Penn.2007).
    12. Cardservice Int’l v. McGee, 950 F. Supp. 737, 741 (E.D. Va. 1997).
    13. Charles of the Ritz Group Ltd. v. Quality King Distributors Inc., 832 F. 2d 1317, 1323, 4 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1778, 1783 (2d Cir. 1987).
    14. Chicago World’s Fair-1992 Corp. v. The 1992 Chicago World’s Fair Comm’n, Civ. No. 83 C 3424 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 16, 1983).
    15. Cline v. 1-888-Plumbing Group, Inc., 146 F. Supp. 2d 351, 370 (S.D.N.Y. 2001).
    16. Columbia Insurance Company v. Seescandy.com, 185 F.R.D. 573, 578 (N.D.Cal.1999).
    17. Cytanovich Reading Ctr. V. Reading Game, 162 Cal. App. 3d 107, 208 Cal. Rptr. 412, 225 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 588 (1st Cir. 1984).
    18. Daimlerchrysler AG v. Donald H. BLOOM, 315 F.3d 932, 65 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1359 (8th Cir. 2003).
    19. DeGidio v. West Group Corp., 191 F. Supp. 2d 904, 908 (N.D. Ohio 2002).
    20. Dial-A-Mattress Franchise Corporation v. Anthony PAGE, 880 F.d 675, 66 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 1449, 11 U.S.P.Q.2d 1644 (2d Cir. 1989).
    21. Dranoff-Perlstein Associates v. Harris J. Sklar, 967 F. 2d 852, 61 USLW 2013, 23 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1174 (3rd Cir. 1992).
    22. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. v. Advantage Rent-A-Car, Inc., 330 F. 3d 1333, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
    23. Eros LLC v. Leatherwood, Case No. 8:2007cv01158 (M.D. Fla. 2007).
    24. Eros LLC v. Simon, Case No. 1:2007cv04447 (E.D.N.Y. 2007).
    25. ETW Corp. v. Jireh Pub., Inc., 332 F. 3d 915, 921 (6th Cir. 2003) (citing Two Pesos. 505 U.S. at 768, 112 S. Ct. 2753).
    26. Fonovisa, Inc. v. Cherry Auction, Inc., 76 F. 3d 259 (9th Cir. 1996).
    27. Franchised Stores of New York, Inc. v. Winter, 394 F. 2d 664, 669 (2d Cir. 1968).
    28. Fruit of the Loom, Inc. v. Girouard, 994 F. 2d at 1363 (9th Cir. 1993).
    29. Fuji Photo Film Co., Inc. v. Shinohara Shoji Kabushiki Kaisha, 754 F. 2d 591, 595-96 225 U.S.P.Q. 540, 542 (5th Cir. 1985).
    30. Giacalone v. Network Solutions, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20807 (N.D. Cal. June 14, 1996).
    31. Gilbert Robinson, Inc. v. Carrie Beverage-Missouri, Inc. 758 F. Supp. 512, 521 (E.D. Mo. 1991).
    32. Gucci America, Inc. v. Hall & Associates, 135 F.Supp.2d 409, 00 Civ. 549 (S.D.N.Y., March 19, 2001).
    33. Hard Rock Café Licensing Corporation v. Concession Services, Inc., 955 F.2d 1143 (7th Cir. 1992).
    34. Hastro Inc. v. Clue Computing Inc., 232 F. 3d 1 (1st Cir. 2000).
    35. Herman Miller, Inc. v. Palazzetti Imports & Exports, Inc., 270 F. 3d 298, 308 (6th Cir. 2001).
    36. Holiday Inns, Inc. v. 800 Reservation, Inc., 86 F.3d 619, 65 USLW 2026, 39 U.S.P.Q.2d 1181, 1996 Fed. App. 0179P (6th Cir. 1996).
    37. Hotels.com, L.P. 573 F. 3d 1300, 91 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1532 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
    38. Intermatic v. Toeppen, 947 F. Supp. 1227, 1239 (N.D. Ill. 1996).
    39. Interstellar Starship Services, Limited v. Epix, Incorporated, 304 F. 3d 936, 64 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1514, 02 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9677, 2002 Daily Journal D.A.R. 10, 947 (9th Cir. 2002).
    40. Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc., 456 U.S. 844, 850, n. 10, 102 S. Ct. 2182, 2187 n. 10, 72 L. Ed. 2d 606 (1982).
    41. Johnston v. Norrell Health Care, Inc., 835 S.W. 2d 565, 567 (Mo. App. 1992).
    42. L.E. Waterman Co. v. Modern Pen Co., 235 U.S. 88, 94 (1914).
    43. Lois Sportswear v. Levi Strauss & Co., 799 F. 2d 867 (2d Cir. 1986).
    44. Lozano Enters. V. La Opinion Pub. Co., 44 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1764 (C.D. Cal. 1997).
    45. M. Kelly Tillery v. Leonard & Sciolla, LLP, 437 F. Supp. 2d 312, 81 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1807 (E.D. Pa. 2006).
    46. Milk Corp. v. Horluck’s, Inc., 59 F. 2d 13, 15 (9th Cir, 1932).
    47. Miss Dig System, Inc., v. Power Plus Engineering, Inc., 944 F. Supp. 600 (E.D. Michigan 1996).
    48. MGM-Pathe Commns, Co. v. Pink Panther Patrol, 774 F. Supp. 869, 876 (S.D.N.Y. 1991).
    49. Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc., 537 U.S. 418, 123 S. Ct. 1115, 155 L. Ed. 2d 1 (2003).
    50. Mobile Oil Corporation v. Pegasus Petroleum Corp., 818 F. 2d 254, 259, 2 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1677, 1682 (2d Cir. 1987).
    51. MTV Networks, Inc. v. Curry, 867 F. Supp. 202, 203-204 n. 2 (S.D.N.Y. 1994).
    52. Murrin v. Midco Communications, Inc., 726 F. Supp. 1195 (D. Minn. 1989).
    53. Nabisco, Inc. and Nabisco Brands Company v. Warner-Lambert Company, 220 F.3d 43, 55 U.S.P.Q.2d 1501 (2d Cir. 2000).
    54. Nissan Motor Co. v. Nissan Computer Corporation, 378 F. 3d 1002, 72 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1078, 04 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7158, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9708 (9th Cir. 2004).
    55. OBH, Inc., v. Spotlight Magazine, Inc., 86 F. Supp. 2d 176 (WDNY 2000).
    56. Paddington Corp. v. Attiki Importers & Distributors, Inc., 996 F. 2d 577, 586 (2d Cir. 1993).
    57. Panavision In Comp Examiner Agency v. Juris, Inc., 1996 U,S, Dist. LEXIS 20259 (C.D. Cal. April 25, 1996).
    58. Panavision International, L.P. v. Toeppen, 141 F. 3d 1316 (9th Cir. 1998).
    59. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney, 263 F. 3d 359 (4th Cir. 2001).
    60. Perfect 10, Inc. v. Visa International Service Association, 494 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. 2007).
    61. Playtex Products, Inc. v. Georgia-Pacific Corporation, 390 F.3d 158, 73 U.S.P.Q.2d 1127 (2d Cir. 2004).
    62. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. v. Bucci, 42 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1430 (S.D.N.Y. 1997).
    63. Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elecs. Corp., 287 F. 2d 492, 495 (2nd Cir. 1961).
    64. Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. Utah Div. of Travel Development, 170 F. 3d 449 (1999).
    65. Scarves By Vera, Inc. v. Todo Imports Ltd., 544 F. 2d 1167, 1172 (2d Cir. 1976).
    66. Sodima v. Int’l Yogurt Co., 662 F. Supp. 839, 852-54 (D. Or. 1987).
    67. Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages, Inc., v. Mathew Wilkins, 920 S.W. 2d 544 (1996).
    68. St. Luke’s Cataract v. James C. Sanderson, 573 F. 3d 1186 (11th Cir. 2009).
    69. Star Indus., Inc. v. Bacardi & Co., Ltd., 412 F. 3d 373. 381 (2nd Cir. 2005).
    70. Steele v. Bulova Watch Co., 344 U.S. 280, 283, 73 S. Ct. 252, 97 L. Ed. 319 (1952).
    71. Sunbeam Products Inc. v. The West Bend Co., 123 F. 3d 246, 251 (5th Cir. 1997).
    72. Teletech Customer Care Mgt., Inc. v. TeleTech Co., 977 F. Supp. 1407, 1413 (C.D. Cal. 1997).
    73. Ternational, L.P. v. Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir. 1998).
    74. Thane International, Inc. v. Trek Bicycle Corporation, 305 F.3d 894, 64 U.S.P.Q.2d 1564, 02 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8175, 2002 Daily Journal D.A.R. 10,296, 2002 Daily Journal D.A.R. 10,843 (9th Cir. 2002).
    75. TrafFix Devices, Inc. v. Mktg. Displays Inc., 532 U.S. 23, 121 S. Ct. 1255, 149 L. Ed. 2d 164 (2001).
    76. U-Haul International, Inc., v. Ed Kresch, 904 F. Supp. 595 (E.D. Michigan 1995).
    77. Washington Speakers Bureau, Inc. v. Leading Auths., Inc., 33 F. Supp. 2d 488, 503-04 (E.D. Va. 1999).
    78. Western Publishing Co., Inc. v. Rose Art Industries, Inc., 910 F. 2d 57, 63, 15 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1545, 1550 (2d Cir. 1990).
    79. Wynn Oil v. Thomas, 839 F. 2d 1183 1186 (6th Cir. 1988).
    80. Yankee Publishing, Inc., v. News America Publishing, Inc., 809 F. Supp. 267, 175 (S.D.N.Y. 1992).
    81. 1800Mattress.Com IP, LLC (substituted for Dial-A-Mattress Operating Corporation), 586 F. 3d 1359, 92 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1682 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
    (ii) Taiwanese Law
    Taiwan Banciao District Court Civil Case Year 96 Zhi Zi No. 15.
    「板橋地方法院民事判決 (96) 智字第15 號」。
    III. Articles/Journals
    1. Abel, S. M., and Fenwick & West LLP. (2009) “Trademarks and Rights of Publicity in the Converged World”, Practicing Law Institute, September, pp. 10.
    2. Dame, L. D. (1997) “Confusingly Dissimilar Applications of Trademark Law to Vanity Telephone Number”, Catholic University Law Review, summer, pp.1-6.
    3. Dougherty, C. and Lastowka, G. (2008) “Virtual Trademark”, Santa Clara Computer and High Technology Law Journal, May, pp. 8.
    4. Hemp, P. (2006) “Avatar-Based Marketing”, Harvard Business Review, June, pp. 56.
    5. Lowry, S. K. (2008) “Property Rights in Virtual Reality: All’s Fair in Life and Warcraft?”, Texas Wesleyan Law Review, Fall, pp. 14.
    6. Mableson, C. J. (2008) “A Summary of Legal Issues at the Intersection of Museums and the Web: Wiki Sites and Virtual Worlds”, American Law of Institute-American Bar Association, Continuing Legal Education, April.
    7. McCarthy, J. T. (2010) “4 McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition §24: 15”, Westlaw International.
    8. McCarthy, J. T. (2010) “4 McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition §24: 24”, Westlaw International.
    9. McCarthy, J. T. (2010) “4 McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition §24: 25”, Westlaw International.
    10. McCarthy, J. T. (2010) “4 McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition §24: 26”, Westlaw International.
    11. McCarthy, J. T. (2010) “4 McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition §24: 31-§24:17”, Westlaw International.
    12. McCarthy, J. T. (2010) “4 McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition §24: 31-§24:43”, Westlaw International.
    13. McCarthy, J. T. (2010) “4 McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition §24: 44”, Westlaw International.
    14. McCarthy, K. E., and King & Spalding LLP (2009) “User Generated Content Affecting Trademarks, including Real Trademarks in Virtual Worlds”, Practising Law Institute, March-April, pp. 3.
    15. Quarmby, B. (2009) “Pirates among the Second Life Islands-Why you should Monitor the Misuse of Your Intellectual Property in Online Virtual Worlds”, Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal, pp. 9-10.
    16. Raysman, R., and Brown, P. (2009) “Computer Law: Drafting and Negotiating Forms”, Law Journal Press, pp. 1-2.
    17. Raysman, R., Pisacreta, E. A., Ostrow, S. H., and Adler, K. A. (2009) “Intellectual Property Licensing: Form and Analysis”, Law Journal Press, pp. 8.
    18. Semuels, A. (2007) “Virtual Marketers Have Second Thoughts About Second Life”, L.A. TIMES, July, pp. 1.
    19. Vern, M (2008) “A New Dimension for Trademark Infringement”, Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, January, pp. 1-2.
    20. 800 Response (2006) “Toll-Free Numbers in Radio Advertising”, Research Report, November, pp. 3-5.
    IV. Others
    1. Consumer Inquiries and Complains Division, Federal Communications Commission (2008) What Is A Toll-Free Number And How Does It Work?, Available: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/tollfree.html [30 Oct. 2009].
    2. Corbett, J. (2010) What are TLD and SLD?, [Online], Available: http://www.sem-answers.com/what-are-tld-and-sld/ [20 April 2010].
    3. Dollinger, P. (2001) The Federal Trademark Anti-Dilution Act: How Famous is Famous?, [Online], Available: http://www.kentlaw.edu/honorsscholars/2001students/writings/dollinger.html#_ftnref63 [24 March 2010].
    4. Duranske, B. (2007) Rampant Trademark Infringement in Second Life Costs Millions, Undermines Future Enforcement, [Online], Available: http://virtuallyblind.com/2007/05/04/trademark-infringement-vws/ [13 May 2010].
    5. Ladas & Parry LLP. (1994) United States-Implementation of GATT TRIPS Agreement, [Online], Available: http://www.ladas.com/BULLETINS/1994/1194Bulletin/US_GATTTRIPSImplementation.html [9 Aug. 2009].
    6. Lin, A. (2007) Virtual Consumption: A Second Life for Earth?, [Online], Available: http://www.law.ucdavis.edu/faculty/Lin/files/Virtual-Consumption.pdf [21 March 2010].
    7. Linden Research, Inc. (2010) Second Life’s Terms of Service, [Online], Available: http://secondlife.com/corporate/tos.php?lang=es-ES [5 July 2010].
    8. Miniwatts Marketing Group (2000-2009) Top 20 Countries with the Highest Number of Internet Users, [Online], Available: http://www.internetworldstats.com/top20.htm [24 June 2010].
    9. Network Solutions Inc., Domain Name Application, [Online], Available: http://www.vashti.net/clntsvcs/DomApp.htm [23 April 2010].
    10. The TASA Group (2008), What IP Attorneys should know about Expectations and Costs for Survey Research, [Online], Available: http://www.tas-consulting.com/ knowledgeCenterDetails.aspx?docTypeID=1&docCatID=13&docID=43 [29 June 2010].
    11. Tysver, D. A. (1996-2008) Lanham (Trademark) Act (15 U.S.C.) Index, [Online], Available: http://www.bitlaw.com/source/15usc/#III [28 March 2010].
    12. Universal Studios (2010) No open! The Wizarding World of Harry Potter at Universal Orlando Resort, [Online], Available: http://media.universalorlando.com/harrypotter/news.php [25 June 2010].
    13. University of Southern California Center for the Digital Future (2006) Online World As Important to Internet Users as Real World?, Press Release, [Online], Available: http://www.digitalcenter.org/pdf/2007-Digital-Future-Report-Press-Release-112906.pdf; cf. Robert K. Elder, Creating a Virtual You, SAC. BEE, Nov. 26, 2006, D1
    14. Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia (2009) Phoneword, [Online], Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoneword [27 Oct. 2009].
    15. Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia (2009) Virtual World, [Online], Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_world [25 Oct. 2009]
    16. World Intellectual Property Organization, Contracting Parties: Paris Convention, [Online], Available: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?lang=en&treaty_id=2 [9 Aug. 2009].
    17. World Intellectual Property Organization, Contracting Parties: Nice Agreement, [Online], Available: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?lang=en&treaty_id=12 [9 Aug. 2009].
    18. YalÁin Gˆl, and Ali, H. (1999) Brand Attitude and Image Congruence Amongst Teenagers, Cranfield University, Silsoe, [Online], Available: https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/bitstream/1826/321/2/SWP0299.pdf [23 March 2010].

    QR CODE