• by April 8, 2008

EMI is the registered owner of the trademark "Entrepreneur," which it has continuously used as the title of its monthly magazine since 1978. See [United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)] trademark registration numbers 1,453,968, 2,263,883. EMI also owns registrations of the "Entrepreneur" mark for a variety of other goods and services, including the domain name for its Web site at www.entrepreneur.com.

In 1995, [Scott Smith, president of BizStarz] started a business under the name ICON Publications, which published a magazine entitled Yearbook of Small Business Icons and which operated a Web site at www.iconpub.com. After gaining publicity on the EMI Web site for his Web site www.iconpub.com in 1996, and with full knowledge of EMI's registered trademarks as early as 1992, Smith, in 1997, changed the name of his magazine to Entrepreneur Illustrated, his company name to EntrepreneurPR, and his Web site domain name to www.entrepreneurpr.com.

Because of actual confusion created by the similarity of Smith's marks with the "Entrepreneur" mark and Smith's refusal to cease using those marks, EMI was forced to file suit for trademark infringement in 1998.

After a federal trial conducted in the Central District of California in 2003, Judge Florence Marie Cooper concluded that Smith had deliberately and intentionally infringed the "Entrepreneur" mark, and as a result, entered a judgment against him which included a permanent injunction against using the "Entrepreneur" mark or any other similar such mark and a money damages in excess of $700,000. (The money damages awarded to EMI have since increased to over $1.3 million.) The judgment against Mr. Smith was unanimously upheld in 2004 by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which concluded that EMI had provided "strong credible evidence" of deliberate and willful infringement by Mr. Smith, namely, that "Smith had intended to confuse consumers." In addition, both the trial court and Court of Appeals concluded that the "Entrepreneur" mark "is a strong and distinctive mark, deserving of significant protection."

Despite clear and unequivocal rulings from both the United States District Court for the Central District of California and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Smith continues to attack EMI's "Entrepreneur" marks. EMI intends to vigorously contest Smith's latest petition before the USPTO and is confident that its rights will once again be vindicated.