Quick question on Tm names etc

[Mountainlife]

If you reg a name that contains or is similar to a tm or popular biz name, and you do not use it, have anything up on it etc, can they still come after you?

 

[Barrucadu]

I believe you can get an unexpected and not very pleasent legal email if the name is 'confusingly similar', no matter what it is used for.

 

[Kate]

If you reg a name that contains or is similar to a tm or popular biz name, and you do not use it, have anything up on it etc, can they still come after you?

Yes.

 

[Ronald Regging]

anyone can come after you for anything

 

[AdoptableDomains]

The old saying "Possession is 9/10ths of the law" holds true with TM domain names.

 

[DNQuest.com]

The old saying "Possession is 9/10ths of the law" holds true with TM domain names.

 

[AdoptableDomains]

...Possession alone can be held against you. It doesn't have to be used.

 

[tpyo]

it can be a lot easier to hold usage against you than possession though.

 

[AdoptableDomains]

it can be a lot easier to hold usage against you than possession though.

Yes, but the question was "..and you do not use it, have anything up on it etc, can they still come after you?"

They may be a bit less likely to come after you or win if they do. BUT they still can come after you. and win in many cases. Unfortunately, some arbitrators have seen non-use as "lack of fair use" and then judged that as what they see as it's opposite, "unfair use". Kind of like guilt by association rather than guilt by evidence.

 

[DNQuest.com]

I see what you were getting at now, sorry.

 

[tpyo]

Unfortunately, some arbitrators have...

yup, udrp is a slighly skewed lottery, at least in the gray areas of not-so-obvious cases; and the outcomes produced by single panelists can sometimes seem harder to predict.

here´s a recent decision

http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2007/d2007-0014.html

chipping away at free speech.

Sometimes I wonder if its simply a coincidence that many panelists are trademark lawyers, whose regular work is usually paid for by the same companies which seem to win most udrp disputes. Corporate stooges or independent panelists?

 

[Ronald Regging]

here´s a recent decision

http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2007/d2007-0014.html

chipping away at free speech.

That case really had nothing to do with free speech, since there was no development on the site. You can't claim that you are using the domain legitimately in a free speech manner, if in fact, you are not using it at all. I think all it would have taken to win this case, would be if the Respondent had replied, claiming some form of legitimate usage.

 

[DNQuest.com]

Typo, you need to get off that subject. Were you the owner of that domain? it kind of seems like it. As I responded elsewhere, it has nothing to do with free speech, it had to do with the domain owner doing all the wrongs things.. heck he didn't even bother to respond. It also had nothing to do with the panelist as you pointed out elsewhere, he did the proper job. I would have ruled the same way.

 

[AdoptableDomains]

heck he didn't even bother to respond.

Good point. The odds of winning when you don't respond have to be somewhere just tiny bit above zero. Not responding is usually taken as an admission that you don't disagree with the complaint and makes the decision real quick & easy for the arbitrator.