In a suit filed in U.S. District Court in Utah, Microsoft alleges that Jason Cox, of Albuquerque, NM, Daniel Goggins, of Provo, UT, and John Jonas, of Springville, UT, “are working together to target marks owned by Microsoft and have registered 324 domain names targeting Microsoft..”

A second lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, names Dan Brown of Long Beach, alleges that Brown “registered 85 domain names that directly target Microsoft.”

In a move designed to identify defendants who registered alleged “infringing domains” via privacy-protection services to conceal their identities, Microsoft filed a third lawsuit, this one in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, against 217 “John Doe” defendants.

“The purpose of this legal action is to unmask the now anonymous registrants of infringing domain names,” said Aaron Kornblum, who serves in the Microsoft’s Internet Safety Enforcement group.

In the press release issued Tuesday, Kornblum said the company saw a surge in domain name registrations that contained Microsoft’s intellectual property earlier this year while monitoring websites registered by known “phishers,” and decided to incorporate legal efforts into the company’s existing “Domain Defense Program,” an effort carried out in conjunction with Microsoft vendor Internet Identity.

“Microsoft has witnessed a virtual land rush for Internet domain names with the goal of driving traffic for profit,” Kornblum said. “Placing a high profile or pop culture trademark in your domain name is a tempting but illegal way to generate pay-per-click revenue.”

In its press release, Microsoft provided a short list of domain names the company has identified as infringing on its intellectual property, including freehotmail.net, gamesonxbox.com, microsoftnewssource.com, office2003.info and halochamp.com.

Rod Rasmussen, director of operations for Internet Identity, said that more than 2,000 domains are registered that contain Microsoft intellectual property on an average day. Of those, Rasmussen said Internet Identity believes that at least three-quarters of those domains are owned by “professional domain name holding operations,” and approximately 25-percent of all domain names that contain Microsoft’s intellectual property are registered through “privacy services” that enable anonymous domain registration.

“These are all very conservative estimates,” claimed Rasmussen. “We’re thinking that we’re really looking at 90-percent or more of domain registrations containing Microsoft trademarks as being these kind of operators.”

According to Microsoft, the ads displayed on such websites are “generally are related in topic – or ‘contextual’ – to the domain name.”

As an example, Microsoft cites the alleged cybersquatter-registered website msnfinance.com. Visiting the site yields a “parked” page filled with links to stock quotes, tips and analysis, but nothing relating to Microsoft or MSN.

“Microsoft hopes to help Web surfers reach their intended Internet destinations,” Kornblum said. “Where you cross the line is when you misuse someone else’s intellectual property in your domain name. Microsoft is aggressively targeting those who misuse Microsoft’s intellectual property for monetary gain.”

The ACPA, enacted in 1999 as part of the Lanham Act, amended the Trademark Act of 1946 to address the growing practice of cybersquatting. The ACPA states, in relevant part, that:

“A person shall be liable in a civil action by the owner of a mark, including a personal name which is protected as a mark under this section, if, without regard to the goods or services of the parties, that person (i) has a bad faith intent to profit from that mark, including a personal name which is protected as a mark under this section; and (ii) registers, traffics in, or uses a domain name that – (I) in the case of a mark that is distinctive at the time of registration of the domain name, is identical or confusingly similar to that mark; (II) in the case of a famous mark that is famous at the time of registration of the domain name, is identical or confusingly similar to or dilutive of that mark; or (III) is a trademark, word, or name protected by reason of section 706 of title 18, United States Code, or section 220506 of title 36, United States Code.”

Under the ACPA, violators are liable for up to $100,000 in statutory damages.

The full text of Microsoft’s press release is available at: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2006/aug06/08-22domaindefense.mspx.

The full text of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act can be found here: http://www.patents.com/acpa.htm.