J. Cosmet. Sci., 66, 411–413 (November/December 2015) 411 Competing for domain names in the cosmetic industry: registrants versus trademark owners GERALD M. LEVINE, ESQ., LEVINE SAMUEL, LLP. Accepted for publication September 28, 2015. Domain names exist solely on the Internet. They are primarily functional elements. Trade- marks exist in actual as well as virtual marketplaces. They, too, are functional when they act as domain names, but they have an additional dimension. And therein lie opportunities for infringement of rights and deceptions popularly known as cybersquatting or cyberpiracy. While domain names are essentially denotative and can belong in no other medium, trade- marks are essentially connotative as identifi ers of sources and qualities of goods and services, which is the basis for their great power to attract consumers and why they are attractive for persons eager to take advantage of their established good will and reputations. These infringements and deceptions have opened up a whole new apparatus of legal pro- ceedings in the cosmetic industry. It would be ill-advised to ignore the legal tools for protecting valuable rights. In the majority of cases, claims of infringement by domain names favor cosmetic trademark owners because most choices of identical or confusingly similar domain names to trademarks are indefensible. In the cyber marketplace, the question arises whether the competing domain names infringe trademarks when they appear to mimic them. There are a couple of takeaways: • Frustration for newly formed businesses without any history in commerce is inevitable and understandable because by this time every word in the dictionary with a good selection of adjectives and adverbs has been registered and are expensive to obtain. • Priority of use of character strings for domain names that could also serve as trademarks is a major factor in determining infringement. PROTECTABILITY OF DOMAIN NAMES AND TRADEMARKS To some extent, domain names registered with no thought of any trademark in mind are protectable assets but only under the right circumstances. For example, dictionary words such as “landmarks” and descriptive phrases such as “bright signs” that may qualify as trademarks by achieving secondary meaning in the marketplace are likely to have associa- tions having nothing to do with anyone’s trademarks. Address all correspondence to Jeffrey Sussman at marketingpro@aol.com.