Quantcast
Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
Internet freedom group wants delay in Utah law
This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2007, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

A organization dedicated to protecting Internet freedom Monday asked Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff to halt implementation of Utah's new Trademark Protection Act, saying it will harm consumers and threatens free speech.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation urged Shurtleff to delay the law's June 30 implementation because consumer groups and law professors "believe that the legislation's restrictions on using trademarks to trigger competitive advertising will have a devastating effect on Internet users, online speech, and Internet commerce."

Last week Google, the world's largest Internet search engine, used similar language to warn the new law is unconstitutional and probably will land Utah in court. The law would curb so-called keyword-triggered advertising.

Rep. Dave Clark, R-Santa Clara, and Sen. Dan Eastman, R-Bountiful, who sponsored the law, say it will create a "cottage industry" in registering trademarks, at $250 each. The lawmakers say the online community is exaggerating the impact of the law, which is meant to protect intellectual property.

Barring a court injunction or second thoughts on the part of lawmakers, the law will take effect at the end of June, protecting Utah registered trademarks from competitors who would pay search engines to key their advertising off of those brands. Under the law, a registered company could sue the search engine and the competitor if such ads are triggered in Utah-based searches.

State lawyers and even the man who drafted the law, Park City-based Unspam Technologies chief executive Matthew Prince, warned lawmakers it could bring lawsuits.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation letter outlines more precisely what it sees as the law's flaws, including that it hinders interstate commerce, may be in conflict with existing federal laws and is "a dangerous step toward transforming trademarks into monopolies on language" that courts have struck down.

gwarchol@sltrib.com

It is telling Shurtleff that Utah's Trademark Protection Act will harm online users
Article Tools

 Print Friendly
 
  • Search Obituaries
  • Place an Obituary

  • Search Cars
  • Search Homes
  • Search Jobs
  • Search Marketplace
  • Search Legal Notices

  • Other Services
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to the Newspaper
  • Login to the Electronic Edition
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact a newsroom staff member
  • Access the Trib Archives
  • Privacy Policy
  • Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.