soggyindo said:
Sudoku is TM'ed Labrocca - to puzzle publisher Nikoli Co. Ltd. I found that out on your
Sudoku site.
Context and what you do with it is important. You might want to have a community site dedicated to looking at the vast influence Chrome has over how we view the web. Considering who's running it, it might become a real concern one day.
Each to their own view IMO
soggyindo, it took some digging to find that trademark. I don't think most folks would have thought or found out that it was a trademark. Looking at the USPTO it is hard to discern that there is a trademark by them, and it looks like it is not enforced as so many other co's are using it for "second meaning" sales. I had to use Google to find the trademark.
I doubt Labrocca intentionally regged this domain as a TM infringing domain as most everyone else here is with "Chrome".
You are right about the context in which you use the domain, but if there is even a hint that these "chrome" domains are trading of off Internet searches then I think big G will come down on them. The volume of UDRP's and lawsuits is shooting up significantly. Google just sued and won a bunch of "Google" domains just the other day.
abercrombie said:
i registered
http://www.surfchrome.com and it took about 3 hours to develop the site. been working on it the entire day adding content and screen shots. i don't think the word "chrome" would be of any copyright violation. i would purposely stay away from having the name "google" in my domain name.
What you meant to say was trademark, not copyright.
You are right about that word not being "copyrighted" b/c it is a single word that is not a work or art, original publication, or anything similar.... so no you cannot copyright it..... just like I can't copyright the word "milk" and call it mine and nobody can now use it. If I could then I would be able to charge every milk manufacturer a royalty for the use of the word "milk" on a milk carton or jug for using my "original" creation of the word "milk". This is also why you can't trademark the word "milk" for milk products, or the word "chrome" for selling chrome. It would impede commerce.
But, you CAN trademark the word "chrome" for use as a "browser", hence the word "chrome" taking on a "second meaining".
So....essentially you are screwed if you use the word chrome or google together, or if you use chrome in any fashion relating to a browser, search engine, Net services..........and PPC ( unless you make sure it has nothing to do with anything near "chrome")
There is getting to be so many new ways that lawyers can show bad faith registration these days that registering domains like these is just idiocy. Even regging domains and using Whois Privacy now can be used to show bad faith intent.
Aceredbaron said:
Actually the most desirable name chrome dot com is a generic website dealing in automotive products and regged in 1994.
While opinions might differ on squatting, what should the owners of those domains regged prior to google's browser launch do?
Hand over the domains ?
e.g.
ichrome regged in 2002.
echrome regged in 2003
There is no need to hand over those old domains. It just means that now they can't use them to sell Net services, have anything to do with Net browsers or search engines, etc....... Google has now staked a claim to those generic words, but used not in a generic sense, but in a secondary sense meaning: chrome = browser , which trademark law allows and protects.
wot said:
I see that nearly all extensions are regged - can't believe these idiots think that having Google in the name is OK. :td:
I think the parking co's need to go in and tell these domainers that they either need to leave or remove the TM domains, or risk having their accounts closed.
