Dynadot
Namecheap

VRdommy

Top Contributor
Impact
6,047
Last edited:
Impact
2,555

This is true, but it's exciting at the same time. It's not just about Facebook trying to rebrand to save their social media empire. It's about Facebook trying to avoid being ruined by their social media scandals just when they are transitioning into becoming the dominant and perhaps unassailable leader in the next decade's multi-trillion dollar metaverse.
 

VRdommy

Top Contributor
Impact
6,047
This is true, but it's exciting at the same time. It's not just about Facebook trying to rebrand to save their social media empire. It's about Facebook trying to avoid being ruined by their social media scandals just when they are transitioning into becoming the dominant and perhaps unassailable leader in the next decade's multi-trillion dollar metaverse.
I am not going to be affected by any re-branding from FB. Not like we are going to have a new term to describe this media ...LOL
But I like to watch the show on what names everyone buys because of it.
 

VRdommy

Top Contributor
Impact
6,047
Some news from Apple glasses.
https://www.fastcompany.com/90690440/what-is-an-independent-creator-vs-instagram-influencer
And this is a bit more crazy, the way they may plan to proyect the image direcctly in to your eye, and not by the usual display. https://appleinsider.com/articles/2...uld-project-ar-directly-onto-a-wearers-retina
I would not get to worked-up about projecting into the eyes as many co's have been testing that for many years, even some promising it and has never been delivered in even a beta.
While it solves a lot of problems, it creates many of it's own.
It's not that they can't do it, it's more they can't do it in a lightweight portable device allowing free movement.
You almost have to bolt them to your head so they stay in sync to your eyes and a long calibration sequence for any movement. Great in a stationary setting where you only look straight ahead.
I'm sure Apple is also doing that research as well, but that tech is at least 8 years away for anyone. Likely much longer in a product we think is portable and desirable.
Magic Leap used a stationary chair lab setting to dazzle investors for the money along with a NDA so nobody could talk about it. But that was projected into the eyes. And it is not how ML 'ONE' worked as delivered.
But it got the SEC off their back.
We are just a long way from home on that one.
 

VRdommy

Top Contributor
Impact
6,047
The star keyword for the month of OCT...

"META"

See the latest hits in the DNJ... https://dnjournal.com/domainsales.htm
Looks like a few investors have been going on a buying spree.

I might add, if you go looking for meta(xxxxx) you will find most of them reg'd more than 10-15 years ago.
 
Last edited:

VRdommy

Top Contributor
Impact
6,047
New...
Top 'Stand alone' now and WOW... PiMax 6k per eye and 200 degree FOV. ( vr12k LOL )

https://uploadvr.com/pimax-reality-standalone/
Not many are going to afford the price tag but, it becomes a new target to beat so I expect it to remain high until there is something similar.

....

I did just reg a name that has been on my short list for years..... 4Dpong
Imagining a VR/AR version in a life sized game.
 

VRdommy

Top Contributor
Impact
6,047
I wonder, have the good old 'virtual' names also increased in value due to the metaboom? I mean, like my 'virtual | recruiting' in king?
I am a bit delayed in a reply as I thought someone would plug this point...
Every name is judged by it's own merit in the end to a end user.

Because most of what we see 'reported and not NDA' are investor buys, it could appear a bit skewed.
Take a look at some of those reported sales of the last 12 months and see how many have been put to use outside of just some traffic capture and redirect.

Take a moment to think about 'you need a name for a product or service'.
Do you care what some other name/keyword not relevant best to what you need or want.
You place value on what best fits your need. When you can't get what you need at a price you can afford, you shop for alternatives.
Just some perspective on how to think about it.
As best I can tell, we are seeing 6-8x investor activity to true end users. But NDA'a hide a lot.
 

Jimmysun

Established Member
Impact
948
ABDBBF9C-3651-4B7C-BCAC-21DA1F774AC6.jpeg
7C356CB1-5874-4015-AAFC-24AD541C4E09.jpeg
 

VRdommy

Top Contributor
Impact
6,047
Those who can not innovate, buy those that can.
https://frontofficesports.com/meta-pushes-into-vr-fitness-with-within-acquisition/
While I would normally frown on this, we all know how hard it has been for start-ups to get funded in a yet unproven field of alt-media.
What these acquisitions say to the market is "This is going to be a thing"
So, I think it may be a good thing overall, provided we see the funding flow from angle investors.
In any case, I think 2022 will be the proving ground for all these little niche's we have been holding names for the last 10 years, and the funding will flow thereafter.
 

VRdommy

Top Contributor
Impact
6,047
For anyone this might matter to,
META alone may not be a highly defendable mark.
I don't believe the terms METAxxxxx as a direct infringement to the mark, but use of the domain has more to say then the term of the name.
Kinda open season, but it remains to be seen how it is deployed in actual use.
Claiming products/services (ie) X, Y & Z are susceptible to challenge when there is not product Y & Z.

And while I am on the subject, I may have mentioned this a long time ago, but here it is in full view for all to see... TM squatters. Just go look at the number of META TM applications for the month of OCT.

Anyway, I don't think I have seen such a long list of products and services in a Mark very many times. It reminds me of Niki's marks when they claim all these products and services and actually have less than 10% of what is listed in actual products and services.

I'm sure we will enjoy a show of court/wipo challenges from even pre-existing marks.
Anyway, like Niki, where they might be likely to loose many challenges based on their list of G&S, not many likely try as they can simply out-money you in litigation. And that is just not right.

But as far as I am concerned, METAxxxx looks good to me. (but not 'meta') and as always,
watch your intent and non-confusing anything you do with it.
This all would be a/my 'OPINION' and may not stand a legal challenge ! LOL

Never seen so much activity over a single term in both names and marks.
Unless something stares me in the face and begs me to buy... I will be sitting this one out, outside of older purchases. I am simply amused.

I might also mention that I have yet to see a 'word mark' for this. Just a 'Image mark' and it is in application phase.
 
Last edited:

VRdommy

Top Contributor
Impact
6,047
I believe I had mention this was going to be the direction a few times here...

Qualcomm is Preparing Developers for the Coming Wave of Smartphone-tethered AR Glasses
https://www.roadtovr.com/qualcomm-preparing-developers-coming-wave-smartphone-tethered-ar-glasses/

In any case, It looks like this will be a breakthrough for AR next year or 2023 for a wider option.
I am quite certain that FB/Meta will be using the Qualcomm chips.
But don't hold your breath until we actually see the type of quality this actually produces in a product on the shelf.
 

VRdommy

Top Contributor
Impact
6,047
LBE fans check this...

HTC’s Vive Focus 3 update could free arcades from VR backpacks
https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/11...cation-based-entertainment-mode-arcade-update

This is a major change that will lead to much more innovation.

...I want to mention while looking at names and their registrars,
I stumbled on several tidbits that surprised me....
One was 'metaio.com' ...reg'd in 04 and pointed at apple servers with no resolve.
It is a corporate domain holder. So, I assume it's theirs. Apple.
 
Last edited:
Impact
2,555
I guess we can cover discussion of 'metaverse' names here? I know Elad has invested in some names already. Anyone else? I did some searching for available names and all the obvious ones are gone. I was really dissapointed that 'metaperverse' had been grabbed.
Yes. But some companies are active / aggresive with defending trademarks and some not. Microsoft is aggresive and when a end user is searching for holo and they see a active word trademark from a product and service provided by Microsoft there is a good change they will not go for holo in their name. But this is a forum and we have not all to agree.

This is my last posting with my opinium about this subject.

Seems to me there is a big differenc between holo and meta. Microsoft branded their headset 'Hololens'. Facebook are going to brand their headsets Meta Quest (etc).

The term 'meta' has not been used before or at least widely, to describe virtual reality, as opposed to metaverse.

The first adult VR site launched under the name "OculusReal****'. They were quickly forced to change it by Facebook.

Having said that, Facebook is trying to claim ownership of the way we describe the new virtual tech, and to make their company synonymous with it. So the more people use metaverse and even meta is good for them,
 
Top