356 F.3d 393 (2004)
The district court's order enjoined defendant from: using plaintiff's trademarks; representing or otherwise suggesting to third parties that defendant's services had the sponsorship, endorsement, or approval of plaintiff; accessing plaintiff's computers by use of automated software programs performing multiple successive queries; and using data obtained from plaintiff's database of contact information of registrants of Internet domain names to solicit the registrants for the sale of web site development services by electronic mail, telephone calls, or direct mail.
- On appeal, the court found that it had no reason to assume that plaintiff's conduct should be considered unethical, especially where the district court made no such finding.
- The district court acted within its discretion in concluding that plaintiff showed a likelihood of success on the merits of its contract claim.
- And, the district court had not abused its discretion in finding that, unless specific relief were granted, defendant's actions would cause plaintiff irreparable harm through loss of reputation, good will, and business opportunities.
The ruling of the district court was affirmed.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Contract Law
Shop for Law School Course Materials.