I recently Registered "Rapid Refund Taxes".com~Quite Generic I believe.

[DnPresident]

We recently Registered "Rapid Refund Taxes".com~Quite Generic?

Well we just got an email from a tax firm stating that they own a similar trademark and I'm cybersquatting them and to turn the name over immediately.

Here's what we believe and sent back via email.....

Rapid refund is an Generic term for filing taxes. It is the same as you saying you have a trademark on Fast Refunds, Quick Refunds or Speedy Refunds..You can not or even attempt to control or monopolize a generic term such as rapid, fast or speedy followed by any generic term such as cars, taxes, delivery, cleaning..

You may get a trademark on the word "Rapid" or any other generic name but this does not mean you can run a monopoly on the internet and threaten everyone using a generic word such as Rapid, Fast or Speedy folowed by another generic term such as Refund, Refunds, Refunded, tax, taxed, taxes,

You may however trademark and actually control a brand name such as YourCompanyREFUND YourCompanyRefunds and so on..

We do not and will never CyberSquat as you suggest and take all and every such threat, charge and or accusation very seriously. We do not and will never transfer ownership of our domain names without an agreed upon sale price between "us the owner" and an interested purchaser.

Dave Crutcher

 

[DNQuest.com]

I just found it unusual that Jackson Hewitt didn't TM that
"Money Now Loan" term.

Normally you see a TM or SM attached to all these big
companies ad slogans.

Patrick

But I am sure they could prove their usage if needed.

 

[jberryhill]

As Mr Berryhill pointed out the recent trademark filing for the word mark
"Rapid Refund" has not been approved.

Key word there being "recent". The older registration for the logo, in which those words dominate, still stands.

Are you saying they were refused the trademark for the words Rapid Refund?

I'm saying they have six months from the date of that action to respond to the currently standing refusal. That's normal.

 

[TaxHour.com]

do you mind if I blog about your story at my tax blog: www.TaxHour.com

 

[jberryhill]

This just in....

http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2007/d2007-1658.html
HRB Royalty, Inc. v. Asif Vadaria

Case No. D2007-1658

 

[DNQuest.com]

Anyone here surprised?

 

[BizBot]

No, not surprising since Wipo rules in favor of the complainant in over 80% of the cases and this one was different from the "Tax Analysts" decision.

 

[tricolorro]

Anyone here surprised?

:hi:

I'm not surprised but disappointed...once again with UDRP panelists.

How could TaxCutters infringe on Tax Cut?

That's like saying Sprinting (fast running) infringes on Sprint telecom.

Afternic thought so when I listed Sprinting.us in their domain marketplace.

Why was Tax Cut ever granted such broad trademark protection in the first place?

H&R Block Tax Cut trademark -yes!

Tax Cut trademark- no!

Patrick

 

[DNQuest.com]

No, not surprising since Wipo rules in favor of the complainant in over 80% of the cases and this one was different from the "Tax Analysts" decision.

84%, and many of those are unchalleneged and many others ARE blatant squatting. The percentage I would like to see where a defended domain could show rights for both sides and the ruling percentages on those cases.

 

[tricolorro]

This just in....

http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2007/d2007-1658.html
HRB Royalty, Inc. v. Asif Vadaria

Case No. D2007-1658

:hi:

I just saw a commercial for H&R Blocks Tax Cut.

Apparently it's a tax software product that lets their customers do their own taxes and connect with a Block rep if they run into trouble.

It's a software product.

How can it be confused with TaxCutInc which offered tax and accounting services?

Patrick

 

[DNQuest.com]

:hi:

I just saw a commercial for H&R Blocks Tax Cut.

Apparently it's a tax software product that lets their customers do their own taxes and connect with a Block rep if they run into trouble.

It's a software product.

How can it be confused with TaxCutInc which offered tax and accounting services?

Patrick

Because that isn't the name of the respondants company...

(ii) The Domain Name takes the form of <taxcutinc.com> and the Respondent apparently does not actually trade under the names “Tax Cut” or “Tax Cut Inc”. He instead trades under the name “Tax Cutters Inc”. The difference is perhaps a small one, but it is an important one, particularly when one bears in mind points (iii) and (iv) below.

 

[tricolorro]

Because that isn't the name of the respondants company...

(ii) The Domain Name takes the form of <taxcutinc.com> and the Respondent apparently does not actually trade under the names “Tax Cut” or “Tax Cut Inc”. He instead trades under the name “Tax Cutters Inc”. The difference is perhaps a small one, but it is an important one, particularly when one bears in mind points (iii) and (iv) below.

:hi:

Yes I saw that their company name is Tax Cutters Inc.

My point is that Tax Cut is a software product not a full-fledged business.

Also if you look at the UDRP decision ,it says:

"This registration is for the words “tax cut... "

But it's not.

It clearly shows a graphic with these words:

H&R Block Tax Cut

That's H&R Block Tax Cut NOT just Tax Cut alone.

The panelist should have seen this.

It's a BIG difference.

Tax Cut is such a common expression.

You hear it so much in the news.

It's such a generic term that no one should be granted trademark rights
for it for tax related purposes.

If you want to call a candy bar Tax cut, fine.

Get your TM.

I just don't like what I see going on with trademark overreach
and domain coveting.

In Canada last year the trademark holder for the words Cheap Tickets
lost its registered trademark while trying to assert its trademark rights against a descriptive domain name registrant.

See here: http://snurl.com/CheapTicketsCase

Unfortunately a similar case in the US courts which tried to overturn the trademark for Cheap Tickets (CheapTickets.com) was (sadly) not successful.


:imho: Purely descriptive words should not be granted trademark rights unless it will be used outside the descriptive meaning

i.e. Apple (computers), Broadway (candy bar), Windows (software).

Generic words or expressions that could be used by many different businesses should be granted only limited trademark rights so others could also use them but differently.

If you don't agree with the above, you will once you have a descriptive or generic domain taken away from you.

The respondent in this Tax Cut case chose to register the domain TaXCutInc.com.

Yet that is not his business name.

Tax Cutters,Inc is.

But taxcuttersinc.com is not registered.

Why not?

I don't have a clue.

Patrick

 

[DnPresident]

Anyone here surprised?

Not at all since the defendent did not reply or respond to the complainant... From what I read any way.

 

[DNQuest.com]

:
The respondent in this Tax Cut case chose to register the domain TaXCutInc.com.

Yet that is not his business name.

Tax Cutters,Inc is.

But taxcuttersinc.com is not registered.

Why not?

I don't have a clue.

Patrick

Because he knew he would get more hits using someone else's TM :P

 

[flamewalker]

Because he knew he would get more hits using someone else's TM :P

Exactly... also the term tax cut is generic when its used in regards to lowering taxes, aka offering a tax cut. Tax Cut software does not lower taxes, it is a software package that assists people in filing their taxes. I believe the TM for Tax Cut (the software) is valid in that it is clearly outside the specific descriptive scope of the term.

Whether the TM is for H&R Block Tax Cut or just Tax Cut, the use of taxcutinc.com for a company called tax cutters, imho is clearly predatory and bad faith use. The fact they didn't respond seems it may indicate they know they were wrong.

 

[tricolorro]

Delete

duplicate post

 

[tricolorro]

Exactly... also the term tax cut is generic when its used in regards to lowering taxes, aka offering a tax cut. Tax Cut software does not lower taxes, it is a software package that assists people in filing their taxes. I believe the TM for Tax Cut (the software) is valid in that it is clearly outside the specific descriptive scope of the term.

Whether the TM is for H&R Block Tax Cut or just Tax Cut, the use of taxcutinc.com for a company called tax cutters, imho is clearly predatory and bad faith use. The fact they didn't respond seems it may indicate they know they were wrong.

He certainly did respond.

"B. Respondent

5.7 The Respondent responds to the Complainant’s contentions as follows:

Trademark rights

5.8 The Respondent makes a number of factual contentions in respect of registered trademark no. No 3,150,594. In particular, he notes that the mark takes the form of a stylised mark, it is descriptive and that the Complainant did not start to use this mark until “long after [he] began use”.

5.9 He also claims the words “Tax Cut” to be two English words that are used extensively in everyday language. He claims that “generic names” such as these are “regarded by the law as free for all to use” and “they are in the public domain”. Reference is made to a large number of other websites that use that term either as the two words “tax cut” or as a single word “taxcut”.

...there's more.

Patrick

 

[DnPresident]

He certainly did respond.

"B. Respondent

5.7 The Respondent responds to the Complainant’s contentions as follows:

Trademark rights

5.8 The Respondent makes a number of factual contentions in respect of registered trademark no. No 3,150,594. In particular, he notes that the mark takes the form of a stylised mark, it is descriptive and that the Complainant did not start to use this mark until “long after [he] began use”.

5.9 He also claims the words “Tax Cut” to be two English words that are used extensively in everyday language. He claims that “generic names” such as these are “regarded by the law as free for all to use” and “they are in the public domain”. Reference is made to a large number of other websites that use that term either as the two words “tax cut” or as a single word “taxcut”.

...there's more.

Patrick

I've read several and got it confused with another....Ooops!

 

[tricolorro]

Originally Posted by tricolorro
He certainly did respond.

"B. Respondent

5.7 The Respondent responds to the Complainant’s contentions as follows:

Trademark rights

5.8 The Respondent makes a number of factual contentions in respect of registered trademark no. No 3,150,594. In particular, he notes that the mark takes the form of a stylised mark, it is descriptive and that the Complainant did not start to use this mark until “long after [he] began use”.

5.9 He also claims the words “Tax Cut” to be two English words that are used extensively in everyday language. He claims that “generic names” such as these are “regarded by the law as free for all to use” and “they are in the public domain”. Reference is made to a large number of other websites that use that term either as the two words “tax cut” or as a single word “taxcut”.

...there's more.

Patrick
----------

I've read several and got it confused with another....Ooops!

:hi:

Don't worry about it.

I'm confused most of the time.

Patrick