New York State
Just briefly on my case:
I used the acne skin care system, Proactiv Solution, a product of Guthy-Renker, in June 2005 and over the next several months, I suffered severe outbreaks of skin lesions that I had never experienced before. When inquiring about these severe outbreaks, Guthy-Renker’s unlicensed medical support representatives advised me to continue using Proactiv and even sold me additional products that only worsened the situation. Ultimately, I ended up getting professional help from a dermatologist who cleared my acne, although I have been left with permanent facial scars and discoloration on my face.
During this time, I suffered anguish and depression, which still hits me today. I feel very strongly about what happened to me. Therefore, I have created a website called propassiv.com to share my experience with others so that what happened to me does not happen to anyone else.
Recently, I have gotten an email from my domain handler stating that Guthy-Renker's trademark lawyers said that I am violating trademark laws and that if I do not contact them, my domain would be cancelled. I don't agree for the following reasons: a) I'm not advertising or profitting from my site, b) I'm simply sharing my experience with Proactiv with others and using a derivative of Proactiv's images to reference them, c) any rational person coming to my site would not confuse it as being run or sponsored by Proactiv.
I understand that Proactiv is a billion dollar company with good lawyers, but I do not wish to shut down or modify my website until I am certain that I have violated trademark laws, as I feel the public should know the possible depressing damages Proactiv can cause. Apparently Proactiv's trademark lawyers disagree with me, so I would like for you, the experts, to visit both proactiv.com and propassiv.com and give me your professional opinions and analysis on what you think of this case - violation of trademark laws or not?
And while we're at it, with the information provided, do you feel that my situation warrants a case?
All opinions welcome.