Leonardo

Leonardo is the journal (founded 1968) of the nonprofit International Society for the Arts, Sciences and Technology (ISAST) and its sister organization, Association Leonardo, which is itself is a French non profit organization dedicated to the study of the interface between the arts and sciences. Upon the entry of the word 'Leonardo', one is highly likely to obtain listings for sites associated with the organization. However, in France, a multinational corporation named Transasia Corporation had recently registered a number of trademarks that incorporated the word Leonardo into their name, and the dilution of the brand name by ISAST was felt to be a capital liability. Transasia owns the brands Leonardo Finance, Leonardo Partners, Leonardo Experts and Leonardo Angels. Due to the fact that users accessing Internet search engines get the related ISAST web pages, TA claims to have lost over one million dollars in revenue, and has filed a suit for that amount plus the removal of all ISAST/Leonardo-based references in all Internet search engines [28]. So far, the suit has resulted in the search and seizure of numerous documents from the home of Frank Malina, former editor of the journal, but has not yet resulted in any electronic restraining injunction against any of the Leonardo/ISAST Internet sites.

The question that arises from this suit is whether an interest can not only exercise brand domination over a relatively common name, but also whether one entity can exert temporal sovereignty over a piece of intellectual property. It would only be logical that Transasia should also seek injunctions over the DaVinci estate, as it would only make sense that Leonardo DaVinci is a further infringement upon their trademark, and must be stricken from the memory of the Net. As media commentator Douglas Rushkoff said at the etoy press conference, 'In 1999, commerce takes precedence, and an artist can be booted off line illegitimately, illogically, and illegally,'' [29]. If this progression is followed to its logical conclusion, that primacy of identity, both spatial and temporal, will center around economic might.

On May 29,2001 a three-judge panel in Nanterre, France, issued a preliminary ruling against Transasia, stating that the two entities offered no competing services [29a]. From this, Leonardo was ruled as not infringing on any Transasia trade name, and was allowed to retain its identity. No compensation for either party was awarded, and although an appeal could have been filed within 30 days, no knowledge of such an appeal is known as of August 1, 2001.

The Leonardo/Transasia case is another clear case of a SLAPP suit in which the defendant could prevail, much in the case of etoy, if that defendant can afford a few tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege of retaining their identity. Although the prevailing opinion is that most defendants in e-identity lawsuits can win given time and resources, corporate concerns also realize the inability of smaller entities to withstand a sum which might constitute a couple years' wages, and some are engaging SLAPP suits in a predatory fashion.