So Can I License 1-800-MCROSFT... to the folks at Slashdot? The Eighth Circuit has handed down an opinion in the Lanham Act case DaimlerChrysler AG v. Bloom, in which it affirmed the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant. At issue was whether Bloom impermissibly used the MERCEDES mark in interstate commerce in violation of Mercedes' trademark rights when it secured the phone number 1-800-MERCEDES and licensed it to various Mercedes dealers around the country. Citing the 1-800-H0LIDAY case, the Eighth Circuit held that merely registering and licensing the number, without more, did not constitute "use in commerce," and that the advertising activities of Bloom's licensees, who were entitled to use the MERCEDES mark under their dealership agreements, could not be imputed to Bloom. Interestingly, the Eighth Circuit noted that, despite the fact that one alphanumeric translation of the number was 1-800-MERCEDES, "the number 1-800-637-2333 is neither phonetically nor visually similar enough to the Marks such that it could be considered a reproduction or a colorable imitation thereof." The Court then goes on to prove that they must be BMW drivers, by noting that "Mercedes argues, rather arrogantly we believe, that this phone number is the same as domain name because everyone knows that 1-800-637-2333 really means 1-800-MERCEDES. We doubt this proposition is as self-evident as Mercedes believes." All of which leads to the question - leaving aside the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (which sounds better than Anti-Cybersquatting Trademark Owner Protection Act, even though that's what it really is), could I legally register a domain name (say, www.mcdonalds.org) without violating the Lanham Act, as long as I only advertise it by the IP number? Surely consumers couldn't be expected to know that 152.140.28.201 really means www.McDonalds.org. (Yes, I'm being somewhat facetious.) It seems to me that the MERCEDES mark constituted the entire value of the 800-number to Bloom's licensees, and they would not have licensed the number but for the association with the MERCEDES trademark. However, I think I may come down on the side of no Lanham Act violation in any event, since Bloom's customers, i.e., the licensees, were surely aware that Bloom was not affiliated with Mercedes, and thus there is no likelihood of confusion. Added later You can check out what The Trademark Blog has to say about the case here.