Hyperlink Confusion?

District Court Judge Buchwald of the Southern District of NY has ruled that the mere appearance on a website of links to another site "will not lead a web-user to conclude that the owner of the site he is visiting is associated with the owner of the linked site." [via BNA] See Knight-McConnell v.Cummins (SDNY 2004) (Buchwald, J) [thanks to the newsletter reader for forwarding the case!]

The case involved two pro-se litigants, one of whom (the defendant), "a day trader who apparently has never met plaintiff, has nonetheless devoted a remarkable amount of time and energy to writing about her on the Internet."

false designation of origin
In order to succeed on a false designation of origin claim, a plaintiff generally must show that she has a valid and protectable mark and that the defendant’s conduct is likely to cause confusion concerning the source or sponsorship of the goods or services in question. The mere appearance on a website of a hyperlink to another site will not lead a web-user to conclude that the owner of the site he is visiting is associated with the owner of the linked site.
...
Post Domain Path Confusion
We similarly find that, given the overall circumstances of this case, defendant’s use of the plaintiff’s name in the post-domain path of a URL and placement of URLs using the plaintiff’s name in the post-domain paths on chat forums, discussion boards, and search engines do not give rise to any source confusion. See Interactive Products Corp. v. a2z Mobile Office Solutions, Inc., 326 F3d 687, 696 [13 ILR (P&F) 303] (6th Cir 2003) (noting that the post-domain path of a URL “merely shows how the website’s data is organized within the host computer’s files” and does not suggest an association between items, even if various search engines link plaintiff’s product and defendant’s Web page).