[iDC] Trademark Infringment in Second Life
Julian Kücklich
julian at kuecklich.de
Sat May 5 01:50:22 EDT 2007
Rampant Trademark Infringment in Second Life Costs Millions Yearly,
Undermines Future Enforcement
(http://virtuallyblind.com/2007/05/04/trademark-infringement-virtual-worlds/)
May 4th, 2007 by Benjamin Duranske
The dirty little legal secret of Second Life isn’t the virtual escorts,
illegal gambling, ponzi schemes, or even money laundering — that all
gets splashed across the front page whenever the mainstream media needs
a scary headline. No, the secret is this: misappropriation of major
corporations’ trademarks in-world is now so ubiquitous, so safe, and so
immensely profitable, that it has become a wholly transparent part of
the Second Life commercial landscape.
Here are a handful of numbers gathered May 4, 2007, that begin to
illuminate the scope of the problem:
* There are at least 16 shops in Second Life advertising that they
sell “Ferrari” cars. One model sells for L$1995 (approximately US
$7.75). Ferrari does not have an official presence in Second Life.
* At least 40 stores in Second Life advertise virtual “Rolex” and
“Chanel” watches, averaging around L$350 (US $1.61). Neither Rolex nor
Chanel runs any of these stores.
* Ferarri Rolex Chanel Gucci Rayban Oakley Prada and Nike
Knock-Offs in Second LifeThere are more than 50 stores in Second Life
carrying virtual sunglasses branded “Gucci,” “Prada,” “Rayban,” and
“Oakley.” Each pair is priced around L$125 (US $0.75). None of these
stores appears to be owned, sponsored, endorsed, or licensed by any of
these companies.
* The term “Gucci” alone generates 106 hits in Second Life
classifieds, referring shoppers to stores selling virtual versions of
nearly every hot product the company makes, including shoes, handbags,
and clothing. “Vuitton” generates 39 hits. “Abercrombie” gets 30.
“Timberland” gets 26. None of these stores appear to be affiliated with
the company behind the name.
* “Nike” holds the record, generating 186 hits, many of which link
to stores where shoppers can find avatar shoes bearing the company’s
distinctive swoosh. Nike itself does not sell any of these shoes.
* Even geek-darling Apple isn’t immune. A half-dozen stores in
Second Life sell virtual “iPods” for avatars. Some add copyright
infringement, preloading the unlicensed “iPods” with songs from artists
ranging from Michael Jackson to Gwen Stefani. Apple is not behind these
stores.
* Of ten randomly selected “shopping malls” found in Second Life’s
classifieds, seven had stores selling goods that exhibited obvious
trademark infringement. Some stores VB visited for this piece appeared
to sell nothing but unlicensed brand-name goods.
This past March, about 11,500,000 transactions took place within Second
Life. There’s no way to know exactly how many involved knock-off goods,
but a quick overview of in-world shopping areas reveals that well over
1% (probably closer to 3-5%) of the goods for sale in-world carry
unlicensed trademarks. For the sake of argument, let’s be conservative
and say that about 1% of the transactions in-world involve unlicensed
trademarks. That’s about 115,000 instances of profitable, in-world
trademark infringement in March, 2007, alone. Projected out, around 1.4
million transactions a year.
Using an average transaction value of $1.50 (less than the current,
saturated-market price of a knock-off Rolex) we’re in the range of US
$2m in transactions involving counterfeit goods in Second Life every
year. That’s quite a bit of money, but it isn’t that much that any
individual business is leaving on the table. At least not yet. So why
should a company care, right now?
Two reasons — one is legal, and the other is practical.
The first is a legal concern: trademark law requires that companies
holding trademarks actively enforce those trademarks in the event of
infringement; failure to do so can ultimately result in loss of
registration for the marks. Moreover, the more trademark dilution is
tolerated by a company, the harder it is to later argue that any
particular infringer should be enjoined.
Trademark attorney Gregory Guillot explains: “When marks are
appropriated unlawfully by unlicensed third parties, Apple Timberland
and Gucci Knock-Offs in Second Lifeconsumers are likely to become
confused regarding the source or origin of goods or services. Trademark
owners should take steps to discover, and prosecute, adverse users. A
trademark owner’s failure to prosecute known infringers of a mark, may
result in a finding of abandonment of trademark rights.”
The second concern is more practical. Even though a company may not want
to enter a virtual world right now, it is only prudent to protect the
option.
Some people (including this author) believe that having a virtual world
presence will soon be as normal as having a web address. That opinion is
no longer just out on the fringes, either. This week’s biggest virtual
world news story was Gartner’s prediction that 80% of internet users
will have some sort of virtual world presence by the year 2011.
Sure, even if the metaverse evangelists are right, that doesn’t mean a
company has to move into this space today. On the other hand, smart
companies will at least pay attention to what’s going on here, and
should move to keep others out of their future virtual space. It will be
much harder for a business to distinguish itself when it does decide to
move into a virtual world if it is competing against hundreds of
established knock-off vendors.
Second Life designer Linden Lab’s official policy on trademark
infringement addresses this question as follows:
Linden staff generally removes content that uses trademarks without
apparent authorization, with or without giving notice to the object
owner. This generally includes all RL corporate logos and brand names.
It is often difficult to tell what may or may not be trademarked.
However, use of designer logos and brand names without permission, such
as Gucci, Nike, Louis Vuiton, etc., are usually not acceptable.
Linden Lab has a well-deserved reputation for respecting intellectual
property. Obviously, it doesn’t support trademark infringement. But it
is equally as obvious that the explosive growth of Second Life has
overwhelmed Linden Lab’s ability to devote sufficient resources — likely
any resources — to this issue. Consider that the list of examples of
marks that are “usually not acceptable” matches the biggest subjects of
infringement almost perfectly. This isn’t really a criticism of Linden
Lab; in the real world, the government doesn’t police trademark usage on
companies’ behalf either.
As in the case of real world trademark infringement, it is up to the
officers of concerned companies themselves to take steps to protect
their companies’ intellectual property in virtual worlds. And it is this
author’s opinion that businesses will need to begin paying close
attention to the problem of trademark infringement in virtual spaces
much sooner than they think, if they wish to avoid legal and practical
difficulties later.
--
julian raul kücklich, ma
http://www.playability.de
More information about the iDC
mailing list