Omni trademark suit might be just the beginning
Andrei Mincov's commentary on the original article
You are allowed to use third party trademarks on your website to indicate the name of the products or services you can lawfully make available through your website. What you can't do is create an impression that you are an authorized distributor of those products—unless, of course, you have such authorization. For example, it's perfectly OK to sell a used iPhone on Craigslist and state that you are selling an iPhone (even though 'IPHONE' is, of course, trademarked by Apple). But it's not OK to create a website weselliphones.com, because that would create the impression that Apple has authorized such use. So in this case, the question would boil down to, are end users confused into believing they're dealing with Omni (or a party authorized by Omni) or is this clear that they're not?