domain Asdense.com

[chriswalton74]

Please appraise....

Asdense.com

Thanks in advance
Chris

 

[Raz0rBlade_uk]

Pointless posting this name here for appraisal without providing all the information
on traffic anyway, guess you just wanted the free advertising then?

$0.00

Provide at least 3 months stats and I'll give you a more accurate appraisal.

I second that

 

[VisualArtistFrankBonilla]

I will post a reply from both sides of the fence. I currently own several typos of a famous name. Maybe it was even mentioned in the posts above. However, I realize that at any day soon, I could receive a letter demanding for me to surrender my domain (s), because it is infringing on someone's trademark. I will gladly surrender it, or them. Not only will I do that, but I will also say "Yes, sir". Why, it has already happened to me, more than once.

Then last time, I regged www.ELoanPay.com . As a matter of fact, it is still regged until March 2006. I can't wait until it expires! www.Eloan.com says I am infringing on their trademark. This is not a typo, but it's the same thing. Sure, I could get a lawyer, and try to fight them. I could say "EloanPay is not Eloan." But why? Why would I want to spend thousands of dollars for a $8 reg? Why would I want to try to fight a big company, who would probably win anyway? What would I gain? Ok, I won, so what? I would probably still own a $8 domain.
It just isn't worth it. Ok, if you get a good typo, and make some parking traffic from it, great! But, realize also, it isn't worth it, if someone wants to sue you for trademark infringement. Especially, if you know they are probably right.
Besides, that is not the true intention of buying domains. It's ok to try and make money, but not in that way. Remember, I said I own some typos too. But, I will give them up in an instant.

:imho: Frank

 

[Gene]

Not true as long as your not omniscient. You are just speculating. There is risk but it's not certain that this domain will be taken away.

You're an intelligent guy (at least I think you're a guy, but I'm not omniscient, so that statement isn't true either). I'm pretty sure you understand the point I was making. The mistake I made was not adding "in my opinion". But then again, how would you know it was MY opinion and not that of my cat. I can't prove that either! One thing I do know, is I'm not going to start adding "IMO" to all my posts.

 

[linker]

trying to be constructive

In this case I don't think there would be any trademark issues if the domain was presented as "As Dense" and was marketed in that way. I am certainly not a lawyer, and I am guilty of owning a few domains that may be trademark infringements, but a two word domain like this should be ok.

Now, I am sure a powerful company could try to make a big stink about it and send a letter or whatever, and maybe there is precedence, but I would hope that a domain like this could be used appropriately by a webmaster who is trying to promote an idea, even though the domain may look like another domain...

A good idea would be to compare objects to a famous "Dense" person - can you say George Dubya...

:hehe:

Anyway, as long as the domain is used in a manner that does not illicitly try to steal or infringe or promote competition against adsense then I say this one is ok...

just my opinion though...

 

[Billy!]

When I saw it I thought it was adsense too! I think its ok.

 

[000]

I agree with Gene. The domain has no real value since Google could easily take it away (I think).

Good luck.

 

[Dave44]

Website Confusion

It is a question of Website confusion NOT Domain Name confusion. What I mean is... you can have a website having the exact name of an existing trademark and yet not infringe. The reason is there are not enough trademarks to go around and so the same trademark can be used as long as there is not confusion.

Consider:
Plaintiff, CD Solutions - owner of the domain name cds.com - was granted declaratory judgment that the cds.com did not infringe the trademark CDS registered by CDS Networks. The District Court emphasized that the relevant confusion is the confusion that affects the purchasing decisions of the customers and that there would be no such confusion in this case. CD solutions sells compact disks while the CDS trademark of CDS Networks is registered for printing and document services. Additionally, the court notes that there is not prohibition against the use of trademarks as domain names, only those that infringe or dilute are prohibited. (citing Lockheed Martin v. NSI 43 USPQ2d 1056 (C.D.Cal., 1997)).

 

[jstep]

No value, stealing fom a known huge company

They have been taking many people to court over domain names, and I fear that the value of the domain is not worth going to court over

 

[fleshas]

reg fee