America Online, Inc. and ICQ, Inc. v. Chih-Hsien Huang, Inc.

A threshold question presented in this trademark and trade name
dispute is whether personal jurisdiction over a defendant exists
based on the defendant's registration of the allegedly infringing
domain name with a registrar located in the forum state. More
specifically, the question is whether a California defendant who
used the Internet to register an allegedly infringing domain name
with a domain name registrar located in Virginia is, on that
basis alone, subject to suit to in Virginia arising from the
registration of the domain name.

eAsia, through its subsidiaries, develops Internet related
software and provides Internet related services for customers in
Taiwan and other parts of Asia. It is apparent from the record
that eAsia directs its products and services primarily, if not
exclusively, at Chinese-speaking regions of Asia. First, eAsia's
web pages are written in Chinese, and any English or other
western words on the pages are rare and used primarily as
trademarks. And second, the undisputed affidavit of eAsia's
president establishes that eAsia's products and services are
aimed at, and marketed exclusively in, Asia.

Among the services eAsia offers is a communications protocol it
refers to as ICQ. It is unclear on this record whether this
service is similar to that offered by plaintiffs under the same
mark. In any event, eAsia registered and used the allegedly
infringing domain names www.picq.com and www.picq.net, and Inforia
Inc., registered and used the allegedly infringing domain name
www.cicq.net>. Both corporations registered the domain names
with Network Solutions Incorporated ("NSI"), at the cost of
approximately $35.00 per year. Significantly, the registration
process occurred entirely online, by way of NSI's web site, and
lasted no more than a few minutes.

Plaintiffs contend that the use of the ICQ mark on defendants'
web pages, and defendants' registration and use of Internet
domain names that incorporate the ICQ mark, infringed plaintiffs'
rights to that mark. They have sued all three defendants under a
variety of theories, including (i) violation of the recently
enacted Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act ("ACPA"),
15 U.S.C. § 1125(d), (ii) false designation of origin and false
advertising, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), (iii) dilution,
15 U.S.C. § 1125(c), (iv) common law unfair competition, (v) common law
service mark infringement, (vi) common law trade name
infringement, and (vii) violation of Virginia's Consumer
Protection Act, Va. Code § 59.1-1-198. In the motion at bar,
eAsia, the only served defendant thus far, seeks dismissal for
lack of personal jurisdiction, or in the alternative, for lack of
venue. Plaintiffs responded that eAsia is subject to personal
jurisdiction in this case by virtue of its having registered the
domain names www.picq.com and www.picq.net with NSI, which is located
in Herndon, Virginia. As an additional factor, plaintiffs argue
that personal jurisdiction is also appropriate because they are
located in the forum state, and therefore the alleged harm was
suffered here.

eAsia's motion to dismiss for lack of
personal jurisdiction was granted.

Unknown

Unknown

While it is clear that NSI and eAsia had a contractual relationship, it
is settled that a contract between a resident of the forum state
and a nonresident defendant does not, by itself, provide
sufficient minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction. ee, e.g.,
Ellicott Machine Corp., Inc., v. John Holland Party Ltd.,
995 F.2d 474, 478 (4th Cir. 1993).