ideas increases. Long after court cases and legislation make cybersquatting a problem of the past, an entrenched set of norms that enshrine property rights in trademarks for rich and powerful corporate interests will hamstring an expansive public domain and the ideal of democratic communication the Internet represents Communicative media such as the internet and entertainment vehicles such as film and music increasingly have become targets by trademark owners seeking to control product and trademark image. However little or no corresponding public benefit accrues that provides justification for the private ownership and IP protection. Trademark, no less than other IP regimes, should"set demanding standards" in exchange for the grant of exclusive rights. Indeed, trademark arguably poses a greater threat to both the core concepts of the marketplace of ideas and the public domain than other IPRs, such copyright law. A specter is haunting cultural production and societal dissent: the threat of private, albeit state-sponsored, suppression of speech is rising to new prominence [in light of] new media of expression,, such as Internet technology. A reexamination of trademark law paradigms is desirable given that"trademark protection intrudes on first amendment rights more often than courts have recognized. 3 Part I of this essay examines the dramatic expansion of intellectual property law generally and summarizes the theoretical underpinnings that gird the four paradigms of 27 See Marina Lao, Federalizing Trade Secret Law in an Information Economy, 59 OHIO ST. L.J. 1633 1640-41(1998) 28 See Note, Putting the Meat Back in Meta-Tagsl, I U. ILL.J. LAW, TECH& POLICY 129, 158 (2001)(contending that"It he continual expansion of a trademark holders rights is detrimental to all of ciety and to the American economy) See Dan L. Burk, Patenting Speech, 79 TEX L REV. 100(2000 (analyzing dangers to free speech and marketplace of ideas arising from patent protection for software)7 ideas increases. Long after court cases and legislation make cybersquatting a problem of the past, an entrenched set of norms that enshrine property rights in trademarks for rich and powerful corporate interests will hamstring an expansive public domain and the ideal of democratic communication the Internet represents. Communicative media such as the Internet and entertainment vehicles such as film and music increasingly have become targets by trademark owners seeking to control product and trademark image. However little or no corresponding public benefit accrues that provides justification for the private ownership and IP protection. Trademark, no less than other IP regimes, should “set demanding standards” in exchange for the grant of exclusive rights.27 Indeed, trademark arguably poses a greater threat to both the core concepts of the marketplace of ideas and the public domain than other IPR’s, such as copyright law.28 A specter is haunting cultural production and societal dissent: the “threat of private, albeit state-sponsored, suppression of speech is rising to new prominence [in light of] new media of expression”, such as Internet technology.29 A reexamination of trademark law paradigms is desirable given that “trademark protection intrudes on first amendment rights more often than courts have recognized.”30 Part I of this essay examines the dramatic expansion of intellectual property law generally and summarizes the theoretical underpinnings that gird the four paradigms of 27 See Marina Lao, Federalizing Trade Secret Law in an Information Economy, 59 OHIO ST. L.J. 1633, 1640-41 (1998). 28 See Note, Putting the Meat Back in Meta-Tags!, 1 U. ILL. J. LAW, TECH. & POLICY 129, 158 (2001)(contending that “[t]he continual expansion of a trademark holder’s rights is detrimental to all of society and to the American economy”). 29 See Dan L. Burk, Patenting Speech, 79 TEX. L. REV. 100 (2000)(analyzing dangers to free speech and marketplace of ideas arising from patent protection for software)