Do IP laws (trademark, etc) make web domain addresses containing celebrity names illegal?
<p>This question pertains specifically to intellectual property laws as interpreted in USA.</p>

<p>For the sake of discussion here are 3 fictional web domains, each including a celebrity name but each with a slightly different nature:</p>

<ol>
<li>allfortrump.com (political)</li>
<li>stingfanclub.com (a fan site targeted for a larger group of people)</li>
<li>ilovetomcruise.com (a personal fan site)</li>
</ol>

<p>(Based on my checking none of these domains are currently registered anywhere)</p>

<p>These cases are examples where the full domain name itself is not trademarked, but merely includes a part of a celebrity name. Admittedly though the particular celebrity is specifically referred to in the domain name.</p>

<p>Do these types of domain names infringe on either the trademark law or other IP laws?</p>

<p><strong>Note:</strong> these domain names are intentionally somewhat different from the domain names "tomcruise.com" (part of <a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/d2006-0560.html" rel="noreferrer">this WIPO arbitration case</a>), "sting.com" (part of <a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-0596.html" rel="noreferrer">this WIPO case</a>), and "trumpcard.com" (part of <a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=D2015-0077" rel="noreferrer">this WIPO case</a>).</p>

<p><a href="https://www.icann.org/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">ICAAN</a>'s Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) was created to allow for trademark holders to challenge domain owners, bring the respondents into binding arbitration, and possibly gain control of the domain name in question.</p>

<p>The UDRP contains what is called the "without intent" clause. The “without intent” clause is not “without intent for commercial gain” but “without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers.” In other words, there can be commercial gain as long as there is no intent “to misleadingly divert consumers.”  </p>

<p>The fair use of domain names relative to non-commercial negative or critical statements is the subject of many UDRP grievances. The term “fair use” is generally associated with protected speech; the right to express opinions in the form of commentary or criticism, but nominative fair use which fails under “noncommercial” (because it is definitely not that) qualifies under “fair use.”</p>

united-states internet trademark domain-name