"The court ordered NMC to pay $58,000 as cost under rule 68, this is less then 2% of what the cost was to defend this case."
It has cost Nissan Computer $3M to defend itself? For a local PC repair shop? Either he's highly principled or just lying.
This entire article can be boiled down to:
"Hey did you know Nissan Motors doesn't own nissan.com?"
"They don't? Wow."
Everything about it is obvious. It's providing no content. The fact that the site has no ads and is made by reputable people means nothing. It's still just an old (and very simple) story with no new information or insight added.
The reason you're not finding much/anything out there is like I said this story started in the '90s, everybody already knows about it except people who weren't around then, and even so, there's not much to tell.
This is an anecdote, not an informative article.
Meanwhile, the site that OP's article was posted on is "the course website for the suite of law & technology courses at Yale University offered by Elizabeth Stark and Brad Rosen" (which is apparently CPSC 183, 184, 185 at Yale University). Publish date of the piece was 2011. So as far as sources go, I'm not sure how much better you could get than this. Not even a single ad, and right under 500 words, which is a nice size for a short take on the subject.
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan#Nissan_Motor_Co_v._Nissa...
2. http://www.nissan.com/Digest/The_Story.php