Ford sued 2600 Enterprises, the publishers of a hacker magazine, not over its registration of the domain name, which insults Ford's biggest rival, but rather over 2600's decision to point the name to Ford.com. Ford reasoned that hyperlinking to its web site or referring to it in DNS (domain name server) records constituted a variety of trade mark violations. Eastern Michigan District Court Judge Robert Cleland flatly rejected all of these claims.
Ford argued that by disparaging Ford's trade mark and preventing Ford from "fully exploiting the value of its mark," 2600's actions constituted a commercial use. However, Cleland disagreed. He drew a distinction between cases in which a trade mark was included as part of a domain name, and this case in which "[2600's] only use of the word 'ford' is in its programming code, which does no more than create a hyperlink - albeit automatic - to [Ford's] ford.com site."
He added that:
"Programming code, unlike the unauthorised use of a trade mark as a domain name, does not inhibit internet users from reaching the web sites that are most likely to be associated with the mark holder. [...] Trademark law does not permit [Ford] to enjoin persons from linking to its homepage simply because it does not like the domain name or other content of the linking web page."
Struan Robertson, editor of OUT-LAW.COM, commented:
"Ford should have ignored the domain name. If it had, few internet users would ever know about it. Instead, it took a gamble, basing its claim on tenuous legal arguments and drawing attention to the name. Canadian Tire recently made the same mistake when it asserted trade mark rights over the domain name CrappyTire.com. It lost the case and, again, the only thing Canadian Tire achieved was embarrassment."