DaveAPN wrote:
I completely disagree, on the exact point Marc made in his post. Fundamentally, the OP is trying to make his site look as if it is run by play united, where in fact he is an affiliate of theirs. Go look at his sites compared to their .com – even I’m hard pressed to find a difference and I’m looking for it. The courts will judge their decisions primarily on intentions, and in this case the domain owners’ intent is to act like play united. He’s even using popups that link to playunited.com!
Dave,
Either you misunderstood me or I am misunderstanding you. Let me try to clarify. Just because someone is an affiliate doesn’t mean they can use the company’s trademark, content, etc without permission. Play United will have favor with the court, because he is using their trademark and trying to get visitors to think he’s Play United.
However, let me back up. I am just talking about USA law. UK can be similar to some degree, but who knows.