A recent lawsuit filed by NameSafe against LifeLock introduced an interesting issue. NameSafe's suit againsttheir competitor alleges that theyused their name even though it is trademarked on search engines.

The suitwas filed in the Middle District of Tennessee and alleges violations of trademark laws and the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.In a press release by NameSafe founder and Chief Executive Officer David Ridings stated

"We have discovered that LifeLock has been sponsoring advertisements on most major search engines including (among others) Google, Yahoo, Lycos, MSN, Dogpile, and AOL, that deceptively led consumers to Lifelock.com. Specifically, when you searched 'Namesafe.com' in any major search engine, you found an advertisement that said 'Namesafe.com' but when you clicked on it, you were not directed to the official site for NAMESAFE (www.namesafe.com), but rather to our competitor, LifeLock.com. It is one of the most bizarre attempts to steal a company brand and its costumers that I have personally seen. Ironically enough, we consider it a form of 'corporate identity theft' from a company that is in the business of protecting identities, and we really could not tolerate it. Having said that, we expect it will stop today."

However, in an article by Stephen Shankland of CNET LifeLock denied the allegations.

"We as a company have never bought any branded search terms belonging to any other company. In fact, we have been the victim of many other companies trying to capitalize on the success of LifeLock by buying the term 'LifeLock'."

Identity Theft Labs pointed out in an article on Name Safe that it was ordinary for an identity protection company to be bidding on each others trademarked terms.

The real problem that needs to be solved then is whether or not competitors should be allowed to bid on your trademarked name.