Dynadot

discuss Libra domains. Fingers crossed!

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

FirstDomainer.com

Established Member
Impact
175
Purchased 3 two word libra .COM domains today. What are your thoughts and suggestions? Well, fingers crossed !!
 
0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
We are at a time when lawyers, lawmakers and governments are significantly behind technology.

I find that particularly amusing. That's why my doctorate has nothing to do with law.

It's painfully obvious from the steps the Libra Association (with an address in a shared work rental space no less) has already taken, that they intend to control and/license who may use the term.

There are plenty of precedents for this sort of thing such as, for example, standards organizations that license certification of the goods and services of others which have been certified to comply with the standards.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
I find that particularly amusing. That's why my doctorate has nothing to do with law.
It wasn't meant to offend so I am glad you find it amusing.:xf.smile:
 
0
•••
There are some general factors, but there are not "exact rules". The belief that there are "exact rules" which cover all possible factual scenarios is one thing that tends to lead domainers astray.

But let's be clear what we are talking about here. A Swiss corporation, the Libra Association, was established some time ago, and recently filed this US trademark registration application:

http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=88485782&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch

The recited goods and services are extensive, and I'm not going to copy and paste them here. The nonsense about some other registration limited to tax services has utterly nothing to do with what is recited in this application.



Not really. It's done all of the time under the various treaties which allow a filing in one place to be treated as if it were filed on an earlier date established elsewhere.

That is why, if you look at the data in the US application linked above, you will find that the application claims the priority right of this earlier-filed application under "Foreign Information":

Priority Claimed:
Yes
Foreign Application Number:
20190018
Foreign Application Filing Date:
Jan. 16, 2019
Foreign Application/Registration Country:
TURKMENISTAN

Now, there are a number of reasons to do that. One of those reasons is that it is very hard to get current filing information from Turkmenistan. Another popular place to quietly file applications is Trinidad & Tobago. An application can be filed in places like that, nobody will know about them, and then months later used as a priority basis for a US filing, once one has put their other ducks in a row.

So, my first observation in all of this "Libra" nonsense is that 99% of what people have been discussing in terms of US trademark documents is pure horsesh*t.

But there is a much more important observation to be made here, because I know there are going to be people who, with scant knowledge of how disputes are actually decided, raise a number of illusory issues about the application status and other things which they believe to be "exact rules" that don't really exist.

Let's have a look at a common UDRP principle used to make decisions:

--------------------
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/#item38

3.8 Can bad faith be found where a domain name was registered before the complainant acquired trademark rights?


3.8.1 Domain names registered before a complainant accrues trademark rights


Subject to scenarios described in 3.8.2 below, where a respondent registers a domain name before the complainant’s trademark rights accrue, panels will not normally find bad faith on the part of the respondent. (This would not however impact a panel’s assessment of a complainant’s standing under the first UDRP element.)

...


3.8.2 Domain names registered in anticipation of trademark rights


As an exception to the general proposition described above in 3.8.1, in certain limited circumstances where the facts of the case establish that the respondent’s intent in registering the domain name was to unfairly capitalize on the complainant’s nascent (typically as yet unregistered) trademark rights, panels have been prepared to find that the respondent has acted in bad faith.


Such scenarios include registration of a domain name: (i) shortly before or after announcement of a corporate merger, (ii) further to the respondent’s insider knowledge (e.g., a former employee), (iii) further to significant media attention (e.g., in connection with a product launch or prominent event), or (iv) following the complainant’s filing of a trademark application.
---------------------


If you go to the link, you'll find that the WIPO Overview also includes links to relevant decisions that will give you some sort of idea of the cases in which this principle has been applied.

So, and this is really the point:

QUIT OBSESSING OVER TRADEMARK DOCUMENTS AND TAKE A LOOK AT THE BROADER OBVIOUS REALITY HERE.

The reality of the situation is this. In June (or whenever) of 2019, Facebook announced they were going to explore the launch of a cryptocurrency product in some sort of affiliation with a Swiss company that was set up for this purpose. Before making that announcement, they bought some tangentially related IP assets, and filed a foreign priority registration application in Turkmenistan, to attempt to cover the waterfront and secure a position in the future to be the exclusive licensor of "LIBRA" for any purpose connected with the product they intend to launch.

They didn't prepare that legal foundation for squirts and laughs.

Now, the way this is going to shake out, is as follows:

1. Some dumb schmuck, in June (or July) of 2019, registers the following domain names:

LibraCoinage.tld
LibraCoinExchange.tld
LibraCrypto.tld

2. Fast forward to 2021. The LIBRA product has been launched and become popular. The Libra Association files a UDRP against the dumb schmuck who registered those domain names back in 2019.

3. The dumb schmuck files his "defense" claiming, "Oh, 'libra' has been a common word and a horoscope sign for a long time. I registered these domain names as social media sites for people born under the sign of Libra to share information about their coin collections" or some stupid sh*t like that.

The dumb schmuck also says, "They didn't have a registered trademark when I registered the domain names and the product didn't even exist at that time" and, my personal favorite, "I wasn't using the domain names for any infringing purpose, I just offered them for sale."

----

Okay, so, given those facts, there is no question what the outcome is going to be:

Nobody is stupid enough to believe that the dumb schmuck registered those domain names right in the midst of all of the media attention simply because it was a coincidence of timing.

Nobody is stupid enough to believe that the dumb schmuck didn't register that list of those names for any reason other than they are directly relevant to the product that Facebook announced its intention to launch.

Nobody is going to give a sh*t what the technical status of some trademark application was, or what is the specific recitation of goods and services in the application (by 2021 a registration).

And nobody is going to believe the dumb schmuck or care about the dumb schmuck's lame arguments, because the obvious reality of the situation is that the dumb schmuck heard that Facebook was going to be launching a product named "Libra" and the dumb schmuck thought he could secure a position wholly based on goodwill attributed to the brand name of that financial product.

Now, do remarkable coincidences happen sometimes? Yes they do.

Is there room in the world for legitimate nominative use of trademarks? Yes there is.

But unusual circumstances require strong and persuasive evidence. Registering a roster of names clearly timed with major media attention to a forthcoming product brand, with lame-brained justifications for having done so, does not do that.
You're asking for trouble trying to sell Libra domains.
 
0
•••
its obvious theres a tm issue with Libracoinage for example but if you reg LibraEmpowers.com which i have btw, it can simply mean that the astrology sign libra empowers. how can they prove a tm issue otherwise?

imo any generic word used with libra not associated with fb libra is safe
 
0
•••
It can also be argued that it can NOT be Trademarked if it is a decentralized blockchain currency.

Quite obviously, the Libra Association's actions, in pursuing a submarine application in Turkmenistan to be used as a priority application in other jurisdictions, suggest that their opinion differs from yours.

So that leaves us with the job of deciding whether you know their plans better than they do.
 
0
•••
Quite obviously, the Libra Association's actions, in pursuing a submarine application in Turkmenistan to be used as a priority application in other jurisdictions, suggest that their opinion differs from yours.

So that leaves us with the job of deciding whether you know their plans better than they do.
What they say and what they do are two different actions. If their plans were known, understood, and trusted they wouldn't be called to testify before U.S. Congress and other global organizations.
 
0
•••
To another point, the TM application is intended to control and is evidence of. Governments and lawmakers have expressed concerns over the possible controlled monopoly created through Libra by the Libra Association network. It is within reason to suggest that the Trademark application hurts the credibility and actions of the Libra Association more than it helps. For that reason, I remain unconvinced the Libra Association will continue to pursue the TM as they continue to get ensnarled into conflicting issues.

Regardless, there is lots to be sorted out before domain investors, that invest in Libra domains, are labeled anything other than speculators.
 
0
•••
How can "AMAZON" be the trademark of an online retailer? Hasn't the Amazon River, or the Greek myth of the Amazons, existed for a long time before the internet?

How can "RED BULL" be a trademark? Aren't there people who own red bulls? Haven't red bulls been around for a long time?

How can "APPLE" be a trademark?

How can "BUD" be a trademark?

These are all well known trademarks.

Many common words are also - apart from their dictionary meaning - trademarks.
Libra already has different trademarks in different classes.
 
0
•••
how can they prove a tm issue otherwise?

Because it was registered within days of Facebook’s announcement, isn’t used for any purpose having to do with astrology, and is simply offered for sale.

So, obviously, someone thought, on June 20th of this year, that a domain with Libra in it might have value. Golly, what happened in June 2019 that could give someone that idea?

Oh, and, get this. The registrant then posted the domain name on an Internet forum in a thread discussing Libra domains!

And not just that. Let’s take a look at what this person DIDN’T do. Does this person have LeoEmpowers? ScorpioEmpowers? CapricornEmpowers?

No. Just LibraEmpowers, and just registered after a ton of media frenzy over a proposed Facebook launch.

The reason for registering that domain name is completely transparent.

Again, you know how little children think they can “hide” by covering their face with their hands? That’s what a lot of domainers look like when they engage in silly rationalizations.
 
Last edited:
6
•••
really? so r u speaking from experience as a tm expert or simply speculating? sounds like some of the data being thrown around here is made up to me in some aspects. spitballing its called.
 
1
•••
really? so r u speaking from experience as a tm expert or simply speculating?

Is that a joke of some kind? Do you think I can somehow not speak from experience as an expert?

No, nobody is going to think that someone who registered LibraEmpowers, Libraology, and LibraMobilePayments in June 2019 did so because of anything having to do with astrology.
 
5
•••
Is that a joke of some kind? Do you think I can somehow not speak from experience as an expert?

No, nobody is going to think that someone who registered LibraEmpowers, Libraology, and LibraMobilePayments in June 2019 did so because of anything having to do with astrology.
whatever bud u r the man
 
0
•••
btw just because a domain is regged at a certain point in time does not mean one thing has to do with another. in your mind maybe but in law u cannot prove one way or the other and its not proper evidence as intent to circumnavigate a tm issue. so what of fb libra news was released at the same time as someone regs alibra astrology related domain.

u r simply speculating on this issue and is not an argument in law. its your assumption so dont come across like u r the tm expert on here as u not even tho u have life experience.

and btw buddy NO thats no joke!
 
1
•••
Is that a joke of some kind? Do you think I can somehow not speak from experience as an expert?

No, nobody is going to think that someone who registered LibraEmpowers, Libraology, and LibraMobilePayments in June 2019 did so because of anything having to do with astrology.
Firstly, are you are acting on the behalf of facebook and the libra association?
Are you saying they won't allow developers to use their platform and name for approved projects? Some already built and being built using the name libra/openly.

They may protect against misuse and scams, but we have no evidence that they won't allow legitimate use. They may even encourage it.

But only time will tell. If facebook decides to ban all libra names from use then folks can drop their handregs. If facebook chooses to allow/approve innovations and development using their platform and name, then the names will be highly valuable.

Facebook and the Libra association will have the say into whats allowed.

Everyone who is honest registered the names knowing the risk and the rewards. Knowing they may lose all the names or gain if it goes in their favor. Nothing is hidden.

I can't speak for anyone who pretends to reg the names for astrological purposes lol, but I won't jump to conclusions either about what facebook will allow and not allow. They could easily put in place a platform for such developments and a means of approval.
 
0
•••
Firstly, are you are acting on the behalf of facebook and the libra association?
Are you saying they won't allow developers to use their platform and name for approved projects? Some already built and being built using the name libra/openly.

They may protect against misuse and scams, but we have no evidence that they won't allow legitimate use. They may even encourage it.

But only time will tell. If facebook decides to ban all libra names from use then folks can drop their handregs. If facebook chooses to allow/approve innovations and development using their platform and name, then the names will be highly valuable.

Facebook and the Libra association will have the say into whats allowed.

Everyone who is honest registered the names knowing the risk and the rewards. Knowing they may lose all the names or gain if it goes in their favor. Nothing is hidden.

I can't speak for anyone who pretends to reg the names for astrological purposes lol, but I won't jump to conclusions either about what facebook will allow and not allow. They could easily put in place a platform for such developments and a means of approval.
I will add, in favor of your point, that the lead engineer of Libra has already promoted and suggested developed websites, using the term Libra, by 3rd party developers. This evidence should not go unnoticed.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Firstly, are you are acting on the behalf of facebook and the libra association?

Are you accusing me of unethically failing to disclose an interest in the matter?

I would be required to disclose that I was working for them.

But the question is really kind of silly from a broader perspective. If I was working for Facebook/Libra and I was telling people that these names may very well be problematic for obvious reasons, then that would certainly answer the question of what their enforcement plans are, now wouldn’t it.

You can go ahead and believe some anonymous person egging you on with false statements like “it’s only for tax services”. I just thought I’d address that ridiculous point.

You can believe whatever suits you. I have explained, on the basis of having represented domain registrants in literally hundreds of domain disputes over nearly two decades, what things a UDRP panel would consider significant here.

Have a good weekend and enjoy the rest of the thread. Ciao.
 
3
•••
meanwhile regging libra domains constantly!
 
0
•••
Are you accusing me of unethically failing to disclose an interest in the matter?

I would be required to disclose that I was working for them.

But the question is really kind of silly from a broader perspective. If I was working for Facebook/Libra and I was telling people that these names may very well be problematic for obvious reasons, then that would certainly answer the question of what their enforcement plans are, now wouldn’t it.

You can go ahead and believe some anonymous person egging you on with false statements like “it’s only for tax services”. I just thought I’d address that ridiculous point.

You can believe whatever suits you. I have explained, on the basis of having represented domain registrants in literally hundreds of domain disputes over nearly two decades, what things a UDRP panel would consider significant here.

Have a good weekend and enjoy the rest of the thread. Ciao.

You really took that literally?

You really thought i was accusing you of being a facebook agent?
Like I really thought facebook would take action by sending a random dude on namepros to debate people who registered Libra names?


Really?

really?

giphy (4).gif
 
1
•••
When you can't debate the facts just call them "ridiculous points" by "dumb schmucks."
 
1
•••
Here is an interesting related article and could be a possible scenario:

"When Magellan Capital filed their trademark application they were attempting to trademark the word “Bitcoin” in the class of “[f]inancial services, namely, providing a virtual currency for use by members of an on-line community via a global computer network.” (emphasis added). Practically speaking, that means that Magellan, if they had been successful, would have had the trademark on essentially any use of the Bitcoin network, since Bitcoin is essentially a virtual currency used by members of an online community via a global network. Thinking about the current cryptocurrency space, who provides this virtual currency? Wallets, exchanges, miners, and so on. You can see why this would be a big deal.

What happened? Well, Magellan abandoned their trademark application. Why would they do that? This should come as no surprise, but there was a public outcry when the Bitcoin community found out about the trademark application. Presumably, those at Magellan decided that it was not worth continuing to pursue the mark, so they filed an express abandonment with the USPTO, and that was that.

One of the promises of crypto is that it is Leaderless™ and Decentralized™. That’s not strictly true, and those concepts are more properly thought of as existing on a spectrum. What is undeniable, is that there are vocal communities that can wield tremendous influence over the “brand” that surrounds these coins. That was true in 2011, and it is still true to this day."

Source:
https://www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/04/27/bitcoin-tm-application-abandoned/
 
1
•••
good info but the naysayers will of course say Libra isnt bitcoin blah blah blah. im quite sure there will be tm issues in certain cases when libra comes out in 2020 but i doubt it will be as big a deal as some of np so called experts think it will be and im talking about some of these self entitled, self absorbed, self important lawyers, included in the mix of EXPERTS (yea right), who think they know it all.

ps note that they r human (or not lol) and make errors like anyone else. many people think that what they believe is in fact reality when its usually some defacto made up reality based on what they have deduced from prior instances that have no correlation to the actual facts.

in short we know squat what will happen until it comes about, so either u reg libra or u dont who cares? its your $ do what u will!

btw bookmark this post and lets see who is sued by the libra group in 2020 if any cause i sure am looking forward to see what the outcome is.
 
1
•••
Sigh .. You guys know that @jberryhill isn't an expert on the subject .. he's THE expert. Go google John Berryhill .. you'll see he's EXTREMELY experienced in intellectual property issues .. as well as such issues specifically related to domains and UDRPs! You all should be EXTREMELY grateful for his participation here .. he's given a couple thousand dollars worth of professional advice in this thread alone.


Are you saying they won't allow developers to use their platform and name for approved projects? Some already built and being built using the name libra/openly
Even if they do allow and approve associated projects .. what you guys don't seem to get is that has NOTHING to do with trademarks. Even if for example .. they are permitted to make a Libra based casino, because of copyright laws, they still will NOT be allowed to call themselves "LibraCasino" without getting explicit and written permission from the Libra Foundation .. which they will never get (even if the foundation approves their app).

Go google all the sites that include "Wordpress". I think it's probably a very good example of what's likely to happen. Wordpress is very encouraging of people making add-ons and such. But they are extremely protective of ANY use of "WordPress" that isn't explicitly controlled by them.


@Internet.Domains .. a few times you've mentioned things could change based on if they go decentralised .. but like with WordPress .. how the blockchain is shared or operated isn't linked to the trademark. The only reason there is no trademark for Bitcoin is because nobody owns it .. it grow unclaimed in the public domain. A much more relevant comparison here would be WordPress.

One would argue that if Libra eventually goes decentralised, then they would actually be even more protective of the trademark to minimise fraud.

Finally .. you are correct in that the governments could indeed stop Libra in it's tracks when it starts (I actually think there's a good chance of that if it looks like it will impact standard government currency) .. but again .. that doesn't have anything to do with the trademarks .. beyond that it doesn't really matter because the minute the governments do put a stop to it .. all those domains are worthless anyhow.


Finally .. there is a HUGE difference between:
1- The Libra Foundation being OK with Libra based apps and services ..
2- The Libra Foundation being OK with external companies using the mark "Libra" within their name so as to appear to be officially part of or affiliated with the Libra Foundation.

1- The Libra Foundation being OK with Libra based apps and services ..
#1 is possible ... and given all the privacy, "Big Brother" and "too strong a monopoly" issues FB is facing, I think that if Libra actually does get past government issues that they will be quite open to outside involvement.

2- The Libra Foundation being OK with external companies using the mark "Libra" within their name so as to appear to be officially part of or affiliated with the Libra Foundation.
#2 is just never going to happen with maybe an extremely small number of exceptions that are more likely to be spun-out services by the foundation itself (who will likely actively go after the domains FAR in advance).

What's even worse for people with Libra crypto related domains, is that in order for a trademark to keep it's legitimacy, the owner actually needs to actively defend it in the long term .. so eventually if there are offenders, they actually have to go after them!


Anyhow .. thanks @jberryhill for your contribution to this thread! Some truly outstanding and relevant information! (Particularly the stuff about using international tricks to get retroactive dating). :)
 
0
•••
1
•••
Sigh .. You guys know that @jberryhill isn't an expert on the subject .. he's THE expert. Go google John Berryhill .. you'll see he's EXTREMELY experienced in intellectual property issues .. as well as such issues specifically related to domains and UDRPs! You all should be EXTREMELY grateful for his participation here .. he's given a couple thousand dollars worth of professional advice in this thread alone.



Even if they do allow and approve associated projects .. what you guys don't seem to get is that has NOTHING to do with trademarks. Even if for example .. they are permitted to make a Libra based casino, because of copyright laws, they still will NOT be allowed to call themselves "LibraCasino" without getting explicit and written permission from the Libra Foundation .. which they will never get (even if the foundation approves their app).

Go google all the sites that include "Wordpress". I think it's probably a very good example of what's likely to happen. Wordpress is very encouraging of people making add-ons and such. But they are extremely protective of ANY use of "WordPress" that isn't explicitly controlled by them.


@Internet.Domains .. a few times you've mentioned things could change based on if they go decentralised .. but like with WordPress .. how the blockchain is shared or operated isn't linked to the trademark. The only reason there is no trademark for Bitcoin is because nobody owns it .. it grow unclaimed in the public domain. A much more relevant comparison here would be WordPress.

One would argue that if Libra eventually goes decentralised, then they would actually be even more protective of the trademark to minimise fraud.

Finally .. you are correct in that the governments could indeed stop Libra in it's tracks when it starts (I actually think there's a good chance of that if it looks like it will impact standard government currency) .. but again .. that doesn't have anything to do with the trademarks .. beyond that it doesn't really matter because the minute the governments do put a stop to it .. all those domains are worthless anyhow.


Finally .. there is a HUGE difference between:
1- The Libra Foundation being OK with Libra based apps and services ..
2- The Libra Foundation being OK with external companies using the mark "Libra" within their name so as to appear to be officially part of or affiliated with the Libra Foundation.

1- The Libra Foundation being OK with Libra based apps and services ..
#1 is possible ... and given all the privacy, "Big Brother" and "too strong a monopoly" issues FB is facing, I think that if Libra actually does get past government issues that they will be quite open to outside involvement.

2- The Libra Foundation being OK with external companies using the mark "Libra" within their name so as to appear to be officially part of or affiliated with the Libra Foundation.
#2 is just never going to happen with maybe an extremely small number of exceptions that are more likely to be spun-out services by the foundation itself (who will likely actively go after the domains FAR in advance).

What's even worse for people with Libra crypto related domains, is that in order for a trademark to keep it's legitimacy, the owner actually needs to actively defend it in the long term .. so eventually if there are offenders, they actually have to go after them!


Anyhow .. thanks @jberryhill for your contribution to this thread! Some truly outstanding and relevant information! (Particularly the stuff about using international tricks to get retroactive dating). :)
There are so many possible scenarios with this roll out. The issues are massive and have depth thats never been explored. Trying to give Libra a cookie cutter approach is unjust and unwarranted.

To think we haven't even yet debated the possibility of the term Libra being, or becoming, generic in cryptocurrency. :xf.grin:
 
1
•••
Honestly .. it's a big deal. The technical/legal certainly could play out many many ways ... but again .. not the trademark. In fact .. after seeing that TechCrunch primer, I'd give it a little more of a chance of making it (since it will actually have a reserve, unlike most other cryptos .. it's actually completely different in that regard to some degree) .. but it also actually made me even more sure that they will even more vigourously enforce the trademark.
 
1
•••
Back