discuss Libra domains. Fingers crossed!

[FirstDomainer.com]

Purchased 3 two word libra .COM domains today. What are your thoughts and suggestions? Well, fingers crossed !!

 

[Internet.Domains]

...says the guy who suggested there was some area of ambiguity around the IRS having completely limited 1031 exchanges to real property.

Don't worry. You can laugh at me from the balcony of your mansion when you get rich from these names.

You come with a great wealth of knowledge, but you really need to work on your delivery.

 

[jberryhill]

If so, can the name LIBRA be trademarked? Isn't LIBRA an astrologicalL sign in the zodiac that exists I believe 2,000 years before this FB Libra project

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.

 

[Internet.Domains]

If you think I'm unpleasant, wait until people start hearing from Facebook's lawyers. They aren't going to show up at Namepros and offer their thoughts for free.

You probably meant the Libra Association's lawyers as Facebook does not own, control or govern the cryptocurrency called Libra.

 

[Internet.Domains]

They are the same lawyers.

https://blogs.findlaw.com/in_house/2012/05/facebook-ipo-legal-fees-hit-26m-for-fenwick-and-west.html

Fenwick and West, the firm identified in the application I linked above, is also the primary firm that handles Facebook's corporate matters.

Before they enforce a TM they need to be granted the TM. What they are proposing is somewhat ambiguous as it competes with FIAT currency. There are legal challenges all around them from governments all over the world. It is certainly possible their claim is denied.

 

[bballdude823]

Thanks @jberryhill for the wealth of knowledge

 

[Dosebuy]

LibraFountain / com
TheLibraHub / com
TheLibraSpot / com
LibraTra / de

If I get a couple of bucks back on any of these I will be happy enough.
Libra is probably here to stay, but the market is to big to get in contact with the end-users for a domain like this I guess.

 

[Internet.Domains]

Whether or not "governments all over the world" don't like cryptocurrency has NOTHING to do with whether they will establish trademark rights in the name of a set of products and services offered under that name.

In the US, for example, cannabis is still illegal under federal criminal law. But...

http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=88155727&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch

Word Mark CANNABISNOW

Goods and Services IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Magazine publishing; Publication of on-line magazines; On-line journals, namely, blogs featuring cannabis; Providing on-line publications in the nature of magazines in the field of cannabis; Providing on-line digital publications in the nature of magazines in the field of cannabis via the Internet; Providing a website featuring blogs and non-downloadable publications in the nature of magazines in the field(s) of cannabis; Publication of magazines; Publication of electronic magazines; Publishing of web magazines. FIRST USE: 20101100. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20101100

Registration Number 5792413

If what you are saying is that governments will somehow prevent or stop the actual use of LIBRA as a cryptocurrency, then obviously the domain names corresponding to a non-existent and unusable service are as worthless as the elaborate initial steps they have taken to securing international trademark rights.

I mean, duh, what good are domain names that relate to a service that doesn't exist?

But the whole "granted a TM" paradigm, which you seem to believe matters, is precisely at the heart of why so many domain registrants end up wasting money on domain names with no value, and potential liabilities.

If you think a registered trademark is required to win a UDRP or to bring a cybersquatting action, then you really don't understand the first thing about trademarks in the US (or English commonwealth countries).

This statement here:



..is simply wrong.

In fact, it is the FIRST question in the WIPO Overview of panel views on common UDRP issues - the UDRP FAQ, if you like:

https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/#item11

1.1 What type of trademark rights are encompassed by the expression “trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights” in UDRP paragraph 4(a)(i)?


1.1.1 The term “trademark or service mark” as used in UDRP paragraph 4(a)(i) encompasses both registered and unregistered (sometimes referred to as common law) marks.

No one needs to "grant" anyone common law trademark rights.

The central part of distributed computing systems that make up a blockchain, such as the Libra Blockchain, is the inability of any one party to censor transactions or control who can and can’t be a part of the network. This is the foundation of decentralization. The Libra Association has specifically stated they intend to go decentralized, while initially rolling out being centralized. One has to wonder if this is to confuse the lawmakers and governments.

Is this an attempt to control a system that is meant to be uncontrolled? Do TM's play a factor with true decentralization?

Libra, if and when it becomes decentralized, must address many concerns regarding privacy, money laundering, consumer protection and financial stability. These all play a factor in decentralized technologies and lawyers, lawmakers and governments must understand the short term and long term objectives.

It can be argued that a Trademark is neccessary if it is a centralized blockchain product.

It can also be argued that it can NOT be Trademarked if it is a decentralized blockchain currency.

The Libra Association needs to settle in and let the governments and lawmakers know exactly what their intentions are now and in the future.

We are at a time when lawyers, lawmakers and governments are significantly behind technology. I will wait to see if those behind can catch up before I make a centralized decision on what is and what is not.

In the meantime the Libra Association needs to establish where they stand because as of now the seem to be standing everywhere.

 

[jberryhill]

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.

 

[Internet.Domains]

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.

 

[NameSellingcom]

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.

 

[artstar]

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

 

[jberryhill]

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.

 

[Internet.Domains]

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.

 

[Internet.Domains]

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.

 

[ivey]

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.

 

[artstar]

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

 

[ivey]

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.

 

[artstar]

meanwhile regging libra domains constantly!

 

[Ategy]

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).

 

[artstar]

These 2 comments have just lost you any credibility you had left on this forum, seriously, I cannot believe you said this. The issue is a few people refuse to admit they have made a mistake. In life, sometimes its fine to admit you were wrong, learn from it and move forward, its what makes you a better person (and domainer)

Its like walking into a doctors room with a headache and the doctor does a scan and tells you about a huge brain tumor you have and you argue with him and tell him its not true and that you know its just a headache.

im so broke up gc, u r the man

 

[ecalc]

... once The Republic of Libra is established, its citizens will definitely want to own your wonderful name...

Given the high potential of this name it might be cost effective to send Pat & Vanna to Tripoli for a week of Wheel and bury in visa small print a clause that host country must replace letter Y with R in all state documents.

 

[domainmanU]

calibraios dot com
calibraandroid dot com
calibrawalletios dot com
calibrawalletandroid dot com
librainvest dot org
buycalibra dot org
libracoinfb dot org
librafb dot org
and many more...

 

[DoughMayne]

calibraios dot com
calibraandroid dot com
calibrawalletios dot com
calibrawalletandroid dot com
librainvest dot org
buycalibra dot org
libracoinfb dot org
librafb dot org
and many more...

Are you ten years old?

 

[Nioccoin]

All the best

Thanks
For you too

 

[asxforum]

.