Holo vs VR vs MR vs AR vs any other reality (All realities)

gilescoley said:

@NamePov

Absolutely correct..It's a new owner so he has purchased a TM domain....whether he knew or not doesn't really matter...thats why you always check first☺

Click to expand...

so where would this leave giles with holotech.com does the name now become tainted as any new buyer for this name runs the risk of buying a now trademarked name and there purchase would put them in trademark infringement as date of sale is after trademark .

There for leaving them open to loosing the name and any cash paid for it as it would now be a trademarked protected name and term so how would giles try to find a sale for this name if this is now the rules we all must play by.

And myself who owns holodog.com and holodogs.com would this fall under the trademark of holopet.com as pet is an umbrella term for all animals and we all saw how microsoft uses the dog as the main drawcard as there pet in the holopet promotion video so would holodogs.com be seen as falling under this trademark for holopet .com or is this just for the term holopet.com.

Do these concerns really only apply to Holo? I mean, if a virtual reality software company creates a game or app called 'VR Pets', can't they trademark 'vrpets'?
This, btw, is why 90% of my names are of an adult theme. Much less likely to be trademarked, and certainly not by the likes of Microsoft. Having said that, a leading adult entertainment company did successfully trademark the term 'virtual s**' quite a few years back.

cordoba said:

Do these concerns really only apply to Holo? I mean, if a virtual reality software company creates a game or app called 'VR Pets', can't they trademark 'vrpets'?
This, btw, is why 90% of my names are of an adult theme. Much less likely to be trademarked, and certainly not by the likes of Microsoft. Having said that, a leading adult entertainment company did successfully trademark the term 'virtual s**' quite a few years back.

Click to expand...

I agree with what you say. The difference with what is happening here though is that most companies applying the trademark will see the added value in adding the dot com equivalent so there is a potential that a sale can be concluded between the trademark holder.

For whatever reason though Microsoft are choosing to just go the app route with most of these keywords without looking to purchase the domain.

Microsoft are a pretty big fish, that is why I would be concerned buying a term they had trademarked.

And as far as the Virtual trademark mentioned. Pretty sure I can remember them acquiring that name, so think they hold the trademark and domain name.

They are well known for using whois privacy.

NamePov said:

Yes you do have rights. If a new owner buys that name though they won't have those rights.



I have always seen your comments advising people to stay away from trademarks because it is not worth the hassle?

Have you now changed your tune and you would advise external companies to buy the following domains:

HoloNotes
HoloStudio

Etc ?

You have always stated that if a domain is ever sold to a new owner after a trademark filed date, that trademark then could be used by the trademark owner against the new domain owner?

dot weekly did a piece on this before which gives a similar view that Microsoft are not doing the .com equivalents much benefit when they are filing these trademarks without purchasing the domains.

http://dotweekly.com/microsoft-files-holonotes-and-holoshot-trademarks/

I have always stated I am a huge Holo domain name fan. But in the same context I am only trying to be honest enough to say that Microsoft filing trademarks on Holo Keywords does give a little concern.

Click to expand...

The domain can not be used in a way that the owner profits from NAME/MARK confusion.
You may not misrepresent the site or confuse it with what is listed as 'goods and services' of the MARK.
So the first thing you should do is look at the G&S of the mark and further determine how narrow or broad that is to determine IF or HOW MUCH a problem that is.

While nobody can give you a lesson on this stuff in these forums,
If you want to play domains, you had better take it upon yourself to learn it or take some losses from it.
It's not that hard, but the best lessons come from reading existing TM case law and watching UDRP determinations. But your first look should be in the history of TM to best understand the fundamentals of why it's there and what it does.

But do not look down on Microsoft or anyone else for obtaining a TM. They have a perfect right to try to protect a brand from intrusion of others. You had the same opportunity and did not use it.
You determined that it was a good name for a product and MS agreed with you, the difference being, they had a product and want to protect it.
The best advise is not to try to sell the name to the TM holder or their competitors.
Hold it and see if they come to you. It's still a cheap bet. Or, put a fair BIN price on it and see if it goes.

But this is one of the many reasons I am not weighted to high with BRANDS. I am 90% GENERICS.

I don't think it has ever been done but I think one could argue that...
"Yes, it is a made-up word, and I made it up FIRST, so it is mine"
And that probably holds true but you have to "use it in biz" to own it. A parked page will not qualify.

cordoba said:

Do these concerns really only apply to Holo? I mean, if a virtual reality software company creates a game or app called 'VR Pets', can't they trademark 'vrpets'?
This, btw, is why 90% of my names are of an adult theme. Much less likely to be trademarked, and certainly not by the likes of Microsoft. Having said that, a leading adult entertainment company did successfully trademark the term 'virtual s**' quite a few years back.

Click to expand...

Think of it this way...
Who uses it first in business? They have the most exclusive rights to continue to use it. TM or not.
It is one thing to 'have rights' and yet another to defend them against intrusion.

It is important to understand what is generic and what is not.
And while you can have a mark, it does not mean it is strongly defend-able if it is even lightly generic.
Take a moment to look up the attempt of Google to TM the term 'GLASS'
Or Apple's attempt to enforce a protection of a mark on 'APP Store'
Or the Candy Crush folks got a TM on 'Candy' and could not defend it.
When it comes to generic words, it is hard to defend a mark except for very narrow specific things.
That should give everyone some insight if you take the time to google them.

VRdommy said:

Think of it this way...
Who uses it first in business? They have the most exclusive rights to continue to use it. TM or not.
It is one thing to 'have rights' and yet another to defend them against intrusion.

It is important to understand what is generic and what is not.
And while you can have a mark, it does not mean it is strongly defend-able if it is even lightly generic.
Take a moment to look up the attempt of Google to TM the term 'GLASS'
Or Apple's attempt to enforce a protection of a mark on 'APP Store'
Or the Candy Crush folks got a TM on 'Candy' and could not defend it.
When it comes to generic words, it is hard to defend a mark except for very narrow specific things.
That should give everyone some insight if you take the time to google them.

Click to expand...

But you also got to ask yourself which company is going to be brave enough to pay a high price for a keyword that's got a trademark applied against it by Microsoft.

I think the standard Goods and Services Microsoft seem to be using for these names are:

Computer software; operating system software; virtual reality software; computer software, namely, software for setting up, operating, configuring, and controlling wearable hardware and wearable computer peripherals

Owning a name before the mark was filed has its perks too @NamePov
Especially if a company like MS files a TM for it.

Nitindomains said:

Owning a name before the mark was filed has its perks too @NamePov
Especially if a company like MS files a TM for it.

Click to expand...

I am sure there are perks @Nitindomains

Not got much experience in monotonization within tech domaining and expecially with regards to trademarked terms filed by big companies.

But it sounds good to hear that there are positives to Microsoft's filing of these trademarks.

My assumption was that it would have had a negative impact in owning the matching .com domain to a trademark. Obviously domaining is a learning curve for me so apologies if that assumption was incorrect

NamePov said:

I am sure there are perks @Nitindomains

Not got much experience in monotonization within tech domaining and expecially with regards to trademarked terms filed by big companies.

But it sounds good to hear that there are positives to Microsoft's filing of these trademarks.

My assumption was that it would have had a negative impact in owning the matching .com domain to a trademark. Obviously domaining is a learning curve for me so apologies if that assumption was incorrect

Click to expand...

It surely is incorrect from my personal experience, especially if the investment in owning those names was substantially low (before the TM's were filed)

One big offer and it's settled and sorted for good great time.

Future of VR Arcades.(also listen to podcast)
http://www.roadtovr.com/future-vr-arcades-vrsenal/

I've never been a believer in Holo domains, don't even own a reg of a 'holo' domain, but if Microsoft own trademarks to all those terms I'm defiantly staying a way from it, as that means they can trademark almost anything, it looks like Microsoft may have a plan to turn 'holo' to a similar brand what Apple do with 'i' (watch/phone/pad etc).

So if that happens, i can't imagine other companies are going to brand themselves around 'Holo' once Microsoft have a few products out on it.

KingslayerVR said:

I've never been a believer in Holo domains, don't even own a reg of a 'holo' domain, but if Microsoft own trademarks to all those terms I'm defiantly staying a way from it, as that means they can trademark almost anything, it looks like Microsoft may have a plan to turn 'holo' to a similar brand what Apple do with 'i' (watch/phone/pad etc).

So if that happens, i can't imagine other companies are going to brand themselves around 'Holo' once Microsoft have a few products out on it.

Click to expand...

Or it could go the other way. Companies my choose to brand themselves with non-trademarked Holo names because customers may associate them with quality.

After the iPod and iPhone came out, companies started putting i in front of lots of words because it subconsciously gave the impression of being high tech and high quality, like Apples own products.

Also, a lot of the startups who will want to brand themselves with Holo are likely going to be developing or selling software/hardware for use with Microsoft's software/hardware. Are Microsoft really looking to push out potential developers and partners before they even get going?

'i' was probably a bad example, as it's only a single letter.

I think 'Holo' could easy be a brand though and a brand Microsoft can easy claim right to owning due to HoloLens and all the other trademarks they own on 'Holo' and will probably file for in the future.

It's like all the Virtua games Sega created in the 90's and outside companies jumping on that term, they can't really do that.

End of the day if companies do brand themselves 'Holo' it will be because of HoloLens, saying you've named your company Holo+keyword because of 'holograms' is not going to hold up well in any dispute either in my opinion unless you are doing something with holograms.

Mixed Reality isn't holograms, it's just a marketing term Microsoft have used in press conferences a few times promoting HoloLens, so if a Mixed Reality company calls themselves 'Holo+Keyword' and Microsoft don't like it, I don't think the other side would have a chance personally.

So looking at that from a domaining pov, i wouldn't ever pay any more than reg fee for a 'holo' keyword, it's just too much of a risk.

Well we'll see how it plays out. I've always seen holo as the natural abbreviation of hologram and holographic, and I expect it to be used in a similar way to how VR has for Virtual Reality.

I think for the HoloLens to be a success, the term Holo needs to be a success too. The best way to prevent a term catching on is to stop anyone else from using it.

Personally I think there are already too many companies and sites using holo in their name for this trend to be halted, but we'll see.

KingslayerVR said:

'i' was probably a bad example, as it's only a single letter.

I think 'Holo' could easy be a brand though and a brand Microsoft can easy claim right to owning due to HoloLens and all the other trademarks they own on 'Holo' and will probably file for in the future.

It's like all the Virtua games Sega created in the 90's and outside companies jumping on that term, they can't really do that.

End of the day if companies do brand themselves 'Holo' it will be because of HoloLens, saying you've named your company Holo+keyword because of 'holograms' is not going to hold up well in any dispute either in my opinion unless you are doing something with holograms.

Mixed Reality isn't holograms, it's just a marketing term Microsoft have used for HoloLens and if a company calls themselves 'Holo+Keyword' and Microsoft don't like it, I personally don't think the other side would have a chance.

So looking at that from a domaining pov, i wouldn't ever pay pay any more than reg fee for a 'holo' keyword, it's just too much of a risk.

Click to expand...

That really is nonsense. Whatever the pedantic scientific literal definition of a hologram, mixed reality is holograms and would be called as such even if Microsoft didn't. Any virtual 3D image appearing in the real world is a hologram in common vernacular, and there were thousands of such examples before the HoloLens came along (and many of the companies involved in producing such things branded themselves as Holo - perhaps they will be taking Microsoft to court?).

Oculus/Facebook have as much chance of trademarking the term 'vr' as Microsoft do of trademarking 'Holo'.

The only nonsense part here is you saying Oculus have as much chance trademarking VR as Microsoft do ‘Holo’

There’s a few headsets recently been demonstrated using 'Windows Holographic' platform, but as you can see there’s a word before 'holographic' (WINDOWS), they seem to have it all on ‘potential’ lockdown.

But we aren’t talking about holograms here anyway, we are talking about the word ‘Holo’ and do you honestly believe hand on heart if it wasn’t for Microsoft calling their headset ‘HoloLens’ we would even be having this conversation or we’d be seeing Holo domain investments? If your being truthful, you know we wouldn’t so with that and going back to what you said here:-

cordoba said:

Oculus/Facebook have as much chance of trademarking the term 'vr' as Microsoft do of trademarking 'Holo'.

Click to expand...

No sole company can claim they own the rights to 'VR', it's a generic term as generic can get and its the same for MR/AR - it's not the case for 'Holo'.

So you've got say if an 'holo' company was standing in the way of Microsoft's interests and Microsoft were to challenge it, they’d probably have a case. Now I’m not saying they will go after every ‘holo’ domain (or company) but the potential is there and if a domain investor (or a company) was to stand in the way of Microsoft's business interests and they can’t buy it for reasonable amount of money then they will probably get it another way quite easily.

And with that I just can’t see a ‘Holo’ domain name ever going for big money, there’s just too much risk for an investor, be it end-user or domainer.

The way I see it is, if MS TM a domain you already own, you may have trouble selling it, but it'll end up getting HUGE amounts of type-in traffic, and if they don't, any company buying it off you while there is no TM on it will be fully entitled to keep and use the domain.

Not buying already TM'd names obviously makes sense, but not buying one in case it gets TM'd seems to be an unnecessary concern.

I also believe holo would have become the key term for hologram and holographic tech/software even without the HoloLens. Multiple keyword phrases get shortened to initials like VR, while long single words like hologram and holographic get abbreviated to holo. It's just natural.

I've never been a believer in Holo domains, don't even own a reg of a 'holo' domain, but if Microsoft own trademarks to all those terms I'm defiantly staying a way from it, as that means they can trademark almost anything, it looks like Microsoft may have a plan to turn 'holo' to a similar brand what Apple do with 'i' (watch/phone/pad etc).

So if that happens, i can't imagine other companies are going to brand themselves around 'Holo' once Microsoft have a few products out on it.

Click to expand...

Just remember if MS have trademarked HoloPet, its only really just that name you have to worry about, don't worry about the fact that you own HoloView or HoloTV or whatever, even if they did decide to TM the name, you owned it the domain before the TM was filed so you will be fine owning the name.

If HOLO becomes the adopted abbreviation for all things hologram-related, there will be a lot of companies using the term HOLO for their business, its just the prefix and suffix that will change.

Its easy to stay out of trouble here, just dont buy any "HOLO" names that are trademarked (HoloPet, HoloTour etc) just check before you buy any.

Maybe this will be a problem for the ngtld Holo.Online Holo.pets Ect
even if you have not exactly what trademarked it was on your page what counts so maybe best not to park it.....

I leave holo alone from now on..

Truth is "Holo" is the official abbreviation for Hologram so they won't be able to trademark the singular term.

They are just using it in the same branding capacity that they did with 360.

I agree that them trademarking certain holo + keywords is not ideal.

But hopefully in the future another company will come along to correctly promote the term and technology.

The hololens isn't really holograms by tech definintion anyway. Microsoft are just trying to set themselves apart from the competition with regards to their marketing strategy.

Maybe this will be a problem for the ngtld Holo.Online Holo.pets Ect
even if you have not exactly what trademarked it was on your page what counts so maybe best not to park it.....

I leave holo alone from now on..

Click to expand...

Yeah I think you are playing with fire if you went for Holo.Pet or Holo.Tour, its far too close to the TM, but if you had oter words like HoloVisual or HoloGear etc I think you will be ok

I have a couple of names I've owned for a few years (1 Holo name) that have had TM's filed but this was years after I purchased it so I'm ok..I would be extra careful what you register or buy now though.

Truth is "Holo" is the official abbreviation for Hologram so they won't be able to trademark the singular term.

Click to expand...

Don't be too sure though, people said the same about Orange, Apple and Caterpillar, surely you cant TM the name of a fruit or animal??

gilescoley said:

Don't be too sure though, people said the same about Orange, Apple and Caterpillar, surely you cant TM the name of a fruit or animal??

Click to expand...

Very true.

Well fingers crossed they don't.

As the owner of holosoftware.com i am surprised that this has not attracted some tm love

Interesting insight into Apples Airpods. We have all been saying these glasses/hmd's need to get lighter/smaller. Might be that connected and wireless wearables is the way to achieve this in the shorter term: