By: James Suh
Internet advertising has become a growing source of frustration
for Internet users. The main source of this frustration seems to
stem from “spam,” or unsolicited “junk” e-mail
advertisements. The phrase “Internet advertising” immediately
conjures up thoughts of closing annoying pop-up advertisements and
sorting through countless unsolicited e-mail advertisements.
These negative connotations often overshadow the increasing value
of the Internet as a free, extensive source of information.
In fact, the Internet has created a more informed consumer.
Using their home computers, Internet consumers can quickly research
comparable products and compare prices of several vendors before
making a purchase. In this way, the Internet has advanced
consumer education and choice. Before the Internet, consumers
looking for snow tires might peruse a few catalogs or travel to an
automotive parts store to inquire about what types of tires were
available. Their access to information about products would
clearly be limited to the brands of tires sold in those catalogs or
stores. Using the Internet, they can find information on
every single manufacturer of snow tires, read product reviews of
all competing brands, and find the best price among several
retailers. While reading a review of one brand, they might
see an ad directing them to information about a competing
brand. This type of advertising exposes consumers to
alternatives that they may not have considered. As such,
advertising has played an integral part in making the Internet a
valuable consumer tool.
The practices of one of the first pop-up advertising vendors,
Gator Corporation, have been the subject of recent
litigation. The plaintiffs, owners and operators of Internet
websites, have argued that Gator’s practice of causing pop-up ads
to appear over their websites violated their intellectual property
rights. This Note evaluates existing trademark, unfair
competition, and copyright standards and applies them to Gator’s
pop-up advertising scheme. It also evaluates some of the
earliest federal cases concerning pop-up advertising and their
disparate outcomes.