.com Just SOLD CryptoCorp .com for $16.5k

[MR PACKER]

Held it since 2000. Maybe sold it too early, but good luck to the new owner.

Still pretty happy with the sale after hand registering it years ago.

 

[namemarket]

Not sure why the TM is being brought up. The name was registered long before that. If handled properly there is zero wrong here. Some of you just sound like bitter novices.

As far as I know a WIPO case or trademark lawsuit is based on date the name last changed hands and acquired. Not the original registration date by someone else.

 

[namemarket]

Thanks if that is the case then current owner can apply for trademark for following term

CryptoCorp.com

Because it is different than

CryptoCorp

Both are different name.

Let me know if I need to learn something new. I am open to learn something new.

Thanks

He can try doing that but probably fail because USPTO checks for name conflicts and when they see the old TM will likely not approve the new TM applicatioan with the .com on the end since it conflicts with the TM. And in a WIPO case extension is ignored according to the rules.

"Word Mark CRYPTOCORP
Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Design, development, and implementation of software solutions for digital currency security, including but not limited to bitcoin currency and transactions involving bitcoin currency; design, development, and implementation of software for Hierarchical Deterministic Multisignature (HDM) wallets and third party verification services for digital currency transactions, including but not limited to transactions involving bitcoin currency; consultancy services related to digital currency transactions software, including but not limited to transactions involving bitcoin currency. FIRST USE: 20131213. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20140303
Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number 86413247
Filing Date October 2, 2014

 

[lambo.com]

As far as I know a WIPO case or trademark lawsuit is based on date the name last changed hands and acquired. Not the original registration date by someone else.

What's up meddler?

 

[TERADOMAIN]

He can try doing that but probably fail because USPTO checks for name conflicts and when they see the old TM will likely not approve the new TM applicatioan with the .com on the end since it conflicts with the TM. And in a WIPO case extension is ignored according to the rules.

"Word Mark CRYPTOCORP
Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Design, development, and implementation of software solutions for digital currency security, including but not limited to bitcoin currency and transactions involving bitcoin currency; design, development, and implementation of software for Hierarchical Deterministic Multisignature (HDM) wallets and third party verification services for digital currency transactions, including but not limited to transactions involving bitcoin currency; consultancy services related to digital currency transactions software, including but not limited to transactions involving bitcoin currency. FIRST USE: 20131213. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20140303
Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number 86413247
Filing Date October 2, 2014

Thanks for sharing. There was

CreditReport.com service Mark was live until 2008. Dead now but was live until 2008.

Application for FreeCreditReport.com was approved in 2006.

Can you please teach us how that thing was approved??

As I said I am a student and open to learn something new without any wrong ego. I am fine if proven wrong so I can learn something new.

Thanks

 

[namemarket]

What's up meddler?

I am sorry you are so upset over the issue. The intention was not upset you in fact I never even realized the buyer was a member here or active in this thread until after I first posted. We all make sales or buys which turned out to be mistakes. P.S. other members chimed-in on the negativity caused by the old trademark long before I participated in the discussion.

 

[lambo.com]

He can try doing that but probably...

Probably huh? Now you all unsure of yourself. Cute.

 

[blockchain]

Congrats

 

[namemarket]

The only mistakes are your poor judgement and believing in your own authority and knowledge on this matter. I know what's up which is why I crush it time and again.

So,if you know what's up please tell us exactly why it is NOT a trademark violation.

 

[namemarket]

Congrats on your sale!
hope newbies note that you held this name 18 years before selling. imo...

Ditto.

 

[lambo.com]

Anyway you don't command my respect enough to warrant any further discussion or debate with you. Focus on your own business and notice your own instincts to meddle.

 

[namerav]

It's NamePros sale

 

[namemarket]

Then reply to other members who are curious as to why it's not a TM violation so you can help in educating all the members. P.S. a buyer not being aware of a trademark is not a good reason, if that is what you are thinking I am guessing.

 

[namemarket]

Thanks for sharing. There was

CreditReport.com service Mark was live until 2008. Dead now but was live until 2008.

Application for FreeCreditReport.com was approved in 2006.

Can you please teach us how that thing was approved??

As I said I am a student and open to learn something new without any wrong ego. I am fine if proven wrong so I can learn something new.

Thanks

As I have said several other times and will not repeat again the most OBVIOUS reason is because they are DIFFERENT words and terms!

 

[namemarket]

Then reply to other members who are curious as to why it's not a TM violation so you can help in educating all the members. P.S. a buyer not being aware of a trademark is not a good reason, if that is what you are thinking I am guessing.

The members are still waiting for a reply to this from marketingstrategies.com to help their knowledge.

 

[namemarket]

It is not being a troll. It's just that when members post incorrect information it may wrongly influence newbies who believe them to take high risks. All buyer has to do is post why it is not a TM violation. Reason he is not doing that is there is no valid explanation so he stays silent on it. And you are also wrong on it, in fact it everything to do with changing hands from a sale. As far as I know and have read many times, purchase date resets the clock so buyer cannot claim name was reg'd long before the TM.

Infringing ads are also not always an issue because you risk a WIPO case loss even with no ads as the name itself is the main risk factor not always based on the ads, if any. Infringing ads only make the WIPO case or lawsuit more solid for plaintiff but a lack does not reduce likelihood of a win.

When a member posts about a sale it's for bragging rights or to get feedback on the price he managed to sell it for, be it high or low and domain value. That's what he got here, tons of feedback. If seller did not want opinions or possible negativity he should not have started thread, or buyer should not have participated. Again I repeat there were other members who posted about the TM issue before I chimed-in.

 

[domainspr]

Congrats on the Sale!!

This comparable sale might have influenced your sale somehow:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/mike-mann-just-sold-cryptoworld-com-for.1060204/

 

[namemarket]

yes, agree and exactly what I was going to say. Seller wanted to discuss the sale and someone (not me) later first implied or said cryptocorp.com value is not that high due to a registered trademark. So why all this anger it is being discussed. It makes no sense.

The more they object to discussion the more popular it gets as it is getting indexed more and more in the search engines and posted on other sites.

 

[elmoney]

Hand regged Crypto*Grp .com, what price set do you recommend?

 

[Josh R]

Hand regged Crypto*Grp .com, what price set do you recommend?

$8

 

[golan]

Hand regged Crypto*Grp .com, what price set do you recommend?

Let it drop.