Pubdate: Sat, 05 May 2007 Source: Times, The (UK) Copyright: 2007 Times Newspapers Ltd Contact: http://www.the-times.co.uk/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/454 Author: Jack Malvern Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?207 (Cannabis - United Kingdom) CANNABIS WEBSITE WINS DOGFIGHT OVER STEALTH JET BRAND It can build aircraft that are invisible to enemy radar and travel at three times the speed of sound, but Lockheed Martin met its match when it took on a small shop in Bexleyheath that sells cannabis paraphernalia. The multibillion-dollar company brought a complaint against Skunk Works, motto "In the leaf we trust", over the domain name www.ukskunkworks.co.uk . The web address should be awarded to Lockheed Martin, lawyers for the aircraft manufacturer claimed, because Skunk Works is the name of its secret research laboratory in California where it developed the F-117 Nighthawk stealth fighter and the F-22 Raptor. It was also responsible for building the U-2 spy planes that flew over the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The aircraft manufacturer sent a 1,000-page document to Nominet, the company that administers British domain names, in October asserting that it was already the owner of several European trademarks for "Skunk Works" and that the cannabis accessories shop was sullying its reputation. The Bexleyheath business responded in November with a single sheet of paper. It won both the first hearing in January, when Nominet dismissed the complaint, and the appeal at the end of last month. Max Mulley, owner of the London shop, said that Lockheed Martin's claim that customers would be confused was ridiculous. "I don't know what the confusion would have been - they sell aeroplanes and we sell smoking equipment. They are a multimillion-dollar company making aeroplanes and we're a small shop in Bexleyheath." Mr Mulley, who estimates that his shop makes about UKP2,000 a month, did not hire any lawyers for the case. "I've done it all myself. They've got highflying lawyers. I'm guessing the whole thing has cost them about UKP40,000." Lockheed Martin declined to comment on how much it had spent, but said that it was considering other options. "Lockheed Martin respectfully disagrees with the conclusions of the panel but plans to continue to enforce its trademark rights in its famous mark." It could attempt to bring a claim against the shop for trademark infringement at the High Court, but a legal expert told The Times that the case would be difficult and expensive. Mark Hickey, of Murgitroyd and Company, said that Lockheed would have to argue that it was an upstanding company and that its reputation was being undermined. "The argument would be that it is like taking the name Rolls-Royce and using it on toilet cleaner," he said. "But it is difficult to see on what basis they could win because you need to have a presence in the mind of the consumer in the first place. Skunk Works is not Rolls-Royce." The judging panel for Nominet disputed the claim from Lockheed Martin, also known as LMC, that British consumers would associate "Skunk Works" with aircraft manufacture. "LMC's original use of the name 'skunk works' was humorous, and a sense of humour may be appropriate to this situation," it said. "There may be some comfort for LMC in the fact that many people have as little wish to be associated with military aircraft as have LMC to be associated with illegal drug use." - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake