trademark Ethereum trademark leads to cryptocurrency domain loss via UDRP

[Templr]

If you’re investing in crypto-domains, think again when registering “Ethereum” keywords: it’s a trademark.

In other words, any use of this trademarked term in domains would be considered a potential UDRP, as in the case of the domain ProjectEthereum.com.

The domain’s registrant is operating a pyramid scheme, according to the UDRP, taking advantage of the cryptocurrency’s popularity and fame.

https://domaingang.com/domain-law/ethereum-trademark-leads-to-cryptocurrency-domain-loss-via-udrp/

 

[Templr]

don't listen to domaingang news

Don't trust Trademarkia. Live search uspto.gov here http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4809:jk8uxn.1.1

 

[lock]

People are registering trademark infringements non stop.
Everyone is trying to encryptmoney. So I bought it.

 

[WhoaDomain.com]

Seems like Stiftung made the first in use trademark going by dates.

Sorry karmaco I'm slow. What do you mean "going by dates"?

 

[WhoaDomain.com]

Ethereum is NOT a crypto currency like Bitcoin. They are 2 entirely different things. Etherium is fuel to conduct transactions on the Etherium platform and is closer to Ripple than Bitcoin. The purpose of Etherium and Ripple is to fund the developers. In a traditional system like Paypal they take fees from each transaction and that subjects companies like paypal to all sorts of regulations that vary from country to country and even state to state within the US. For things like Ripple and Etherium the model is to create a taken that is needed to complet transactions on thier platform. when you performa transaction on Ripple then you have to use up some Ripples to complete the transaxction. it is said Ripples are “destryed.” Because these tokens are really a type of investment offering they are regulated and the people who make Ripple paid a $750K fine to the SEC for seals they made with Roger Ver (aka, Bitcoin Jesus).

For Etherium there is the added issue that the system uses “turing complete” scripts for their transactions. this means programming loops. to avoid infinite loops you use up some tokens each time you pass through the loop so you would evetually run out of tokens and the program would stop.

Bitcoin is totally different, it is decentralized and the original developer is anonymous. While there were some trademarks in the early days I am not sure any trademark for Bitcoin involing its use as a cryptocurrency could be an enforceable trademark. I obtained the first trademark on the pricipal register in the US that contained Bitcoin with my “MILLY BITCOIN” registration. I actually used that to challange a bogus BITCOIN trademark registration and the guy just defaulted.

There are some sites that use such trademarked names in their domain names for their fully operational sites like

RippleCoinNews.com
Or
Ethereumworldnews.com

One could argue that their sites are news sites not a crypto business but they do talk alot about crypto especially the crypto named in their domain.

What gives?

There's even sites that ARE crypto exchanges that allow trading of coins like RippleFox.com?

I guess if in the end the site using the TM earns the TM holders money or serves the tm's best interest the offenders can fly under the radar or is it risky?

I think this urdp mentioned here was doing bad things which made them a target.

What do you all think? Or is it time to throw out Ethereum domains ?

 

[nicholas]

At this point, it remains to be seen what Stiftung intends for the future, because although this case is a UDRP, it also appears that the motivation behind it is to take out a bad actor that was operating a pyramid scheme, taking advantage of Ethereum's name, popularity and fame to defraud innocent people of their money.

 

[J.R.]

Ouch. I think that leaves Ethereum.com dead in the water - the risk of post-sale UDRP is incredibly high. The owner will have received some pretty hefty offers over the last couple of years - must be kicking themselves now for not making hay whilst the sun was shining.

Or some fool unaware of the UDRP threat will come through and buy Ethereum.com and end up like the poor sap that spent $75K on WashingtonJournal.com only to be UDRP'd by CSPAN less than 60 days later. Yikes!

https://domainnamewire.com/2017/09/21/make-sure-contact-info-updated-sell-domain/

 

[Acroplex]

F.A.K.E N.E.W.S

Of course it's not "fake news." Maybe you've been under a rock for the past 8 years, or you're just a n00b.

 

[Acroplex]

don't listen to domaingang news

https://www.trademarkia.com/trademarks-search.aspx?tn=ethereum

Frank, get your head out of your ass. Those applied for trademarks are opposed by the Swiss foundation. The only live mark for "ETHEREUM" is theirs.

 

[Acroplex]

Then someone should hurry and trademark Bitcoin.

Bitcoin already forms part of many trademarks, son. But unlike Ethereum, it has no centralized owners to operate from. It's nobody's invented brand. So nobody can easily claim BITCOIN as a mark. The Ethereum guys did the right thing.

 

[Acroplex]

Or some fool unaware of the UDRP threat will come through and buy Ethereum.com and end up like the poor sap that spent $75K on WashingtonJournal.com only to be UDRP'd by CSPAN less than 60 days later. Yikes!

https://domainnamewire.com/2017/09/21/make-sure-contact-info-updated-sell-domain/

Ethereum.com was registered 2 years before ETHEREUM was first used; three years before it was used in commerce, per the Swiss foundation's tm application.

That being said, a new owner of the domain would better stay clear of any use that'd infringe on the mark: nothing related to crypto, potentially software, banking services etc.

In other words, the biggest potential buyer of the domain is the Ethereum foundation. Would they pay $10 MM? I doubt it.

 

[IMEZI]

Here's a link to the actual case:
http://www.udrpsearch.com/naf/1746664

The respondent never even replied.

domain status were TRANSFERED it's mean complainant WIN the case and got the domain

 

[frank-germany]

Frank, get your head out of your ass. Those applied for trademarks are opposed by the Swiss foundation. The only live mark for "ETHEREUM" is theirs.

well you may thinks its funny
mixing real news with made up nonsense

I think thats its a sure way to become confused

 

[Constantin S]

Of course it's not "fake news." Maybe you've been under a rock for the past 8 years, or you're just a n00b.

I don't know if you're aware but DomainGang is renowned for spreading fake news, your reply to my comment only shows how trustworthy you and DomainGang are.
If you belive that spreading some true news articles will clear your reputation probably you're the one living "under a rock".
While I do not deny your contributions for the domaining industry, your way of doing it is definetly far for being 100% clean

 

[Acroplex]

"Renowned?" Son, less than 10% of the DG articles are parody, in case you wanted to know.

And I really am past the point of caring if a handful of folks do not like what I do or how I do it, that was 8 years ago when the blog started. To criticize something, you need to first understand how it works. If you don't like it, that's fine. Your knee jerk reaction clearly shows you don't read or comprehend any of it, especially the article quoted here, which apparently you didn't care to read.

 

[Silentptnr]

"Renowned?" Son, less than 10% of the DG articles are parody, in case you wanted to know.

And I really am past the point of caring if a handful of folks do not like what I do or how I do it, that was 8 years ago when the blog started. To criticize something, you need to first understand how it works. If you don't like it, that's fine. Your knee jerk reaction clearly shows you don't read or comprehend any of it, especially the article quoted here, which apparently you didn't care to read.

I love the DG site. Just saying

 

[Criterion811]

Silentptnr - thanks for posting the UDRP report, interesting read. I have a domain name I recently acquired and it's a US trademark (I am UK based) but it's listed as dormant, no activity for years, so this is a particulalry interesting topic. Cheers

 

[Acroplex]

Thanks, @Silentptnr - I'm ok with those that do not like/understand the focus of the blog. I'm not ok when an article that is real and researched gets discounted by those that didn't read it.

 

[Silentptnr]

Thanks, @Silentptnr - I'm ok with those that do not like/understand the focus of the blog. I'm not ok when an article that is real and researched gets discounted by those that didn't read it.

I learned some time ago that when dealing in a global industry like domaining, people definitely see things differently around the world. I once thought something was funny but another person was offended and didn't get the humor at all. Oh well. It's the world we live in.

 

[J.R.]

Ethereum.com was registered 2 years before ETHEREUM was first used; three years before it was used in commerce, per the Swiss foundation's tm application.

That being said, a new owner of the domain would better stay clear of any use that'd infringe on the mark: nothing related to crypto, potentially software, banking services etc.

In other words, the biggest potential buyer of the domain is the Ethereum foundation. Would they pay $10 MM? I doubt it.

You summed it up nicely. Why would Ethereum pay $10M, if they know other potential buyers would be looking to use it for banking services, crypto, etc. hence they could UDRP them immediately. The domain holder should build something on the site, not related to existing trademarks and possibly Ethereum would come along and buy it for a substantial sum.

It will be interesting to see what happens with Ethereum.com as the crypto-currency market heats up over the next 1-3 years.

 

[Acroplex]

I have a hunch that the original 2007 registration, made by a company creating turf (green) varieties, was done with that purpose in mind: a turf brand!

 

[alcy]

Many people don't understand the difference between things like Bitcoin and Litecoin and things like Etherium and Ripple. However, it is different from Equifax in that Etherium and Ripple have decentralized aspects to them and it is expected that companies will offer services on the platform they created. Equifax, like paypal, is a completely closed platform where these crypto systems are not. What this all means in terms of trademarks I don't know but it is somewhat of new issue due to the decentralized aspects.

mmmm.. wasn't ripple centralized?

 

[likeslikes]

I wonder if they'll go after "ether" too...I've got a name with it in it.

 

[consumers]

mmmm.. wasn't ripple centralized?

Parts of it are. Not sure if you mean the Ripple token or the Ripple platform but there are all sorts of complicated discussions about how Ripple works but the main idea is that Ripples are created fund the developers. Not that you can't make money off it by trading it but it is not a cryptocurrency and I have never seen any store offering to sell things in exchange for Ripple (or Ethereum). The Ripple concept actually predates Bitcoin and some people who got involved in Bitcoin early got involved with ripple first. The concept is that you collect transactions fees in a roundabout way to avoid regulation by creating a token that is "destroyed" when completing a transaction. The problem with ripple is that you need to trust "gateways" (but that may perfectly fine in many circumstances) and it allows you to trade many different currencies/tokens easily.

 

[shorterwinters]

mmmm.. wasn't ripple centralized?

 

[consumers]

Of course new coins are coming on board all the time. Maybe someone here could become a developer.