Trademarks versus Fair Use and use of celebrity names

[dnadomain]

I have a few questions and would appreciate some feedback from the smart ones on here.

A lot of talk regarding trademarks and registering sites based on those names.


1)
If I am, for example to specialize in blenders, and register names of blender models, lets say the blendit2000.com, blendit3.com, would that be dangerous? I have done much research and have found many ecommerce sites that use this approach, for instance (brandname)(item).com, and then use that platform to create an ecommerce site that sells that exact product.

Think WhirlpoolDishwasher.com, or RugerGuns.com (not real, used to illustrate a point.)

These sites have been in operation for many years without interruption. Lucky or just smart?

2)
Also, if one is to make a celebrity oriented site, lets say a fan site with some content to generate ad dollars, would using the celebrity's name be dangerous? Think BeiberFever.com (another example to illustrate a point, not real). If you search online there are many fansites with the name JustinBeiber in them that are operational.

If you wanted to make a site like BeiberArrested.com, would that work? Would it be worth it, if lets say he got arrested and the news went viral on it? I guess you would consider this headline chasing, like registering ZimmermanNotGuilty.com. Has anyone done something like that and made some decent $?

3)
And, what if one were to start a celebrity home site, like CelebDigs.com (real site), would that be "dangerous?"

 

[equity78]

There are no guarantees and all sites using someone elses Intellectual Property or Celebrity names carry risk. Examples of sites getting away with it don't matter.

If you get a UDRP you will have to deal with it, I had a friend point out to a well know organization that all the other extensions were taken, why were they going after him ? They told him we want your name and they got the name.

These sites also carry risk in the fact that celebrity pics are expensive, if you want updated content, of course some just take them and then get DMCA requests as people will protect images that belong to them.

Some celebs buy their domain like Oliver Stone, $6,000 and a signed script, many others demand the name and then follow a UDRP, most win a few have lost.

Each celebrity and their management have different opinions on Fansites, usually non commercial sites get a pass from those who do not want to upset their fans and get bad publicity. Others may want to control their marks online and go after every site, someone as popular as Bieber has a lot of fans and his management may not be on top of every site as that could take a lot of time.

The question is risk vs reward ? Then the ability to deal with complaints and possible UDRP.

The other point is what is a site offering that TMZ and Variety and Deadline HollyWood etc...are not and why would people come to the site. The names have 0 to little resale value as a pure domain play.

You can always get lucky and register a domain of an upcoming actor or musician who breaks out, but the negative pr may not be worth it being designated as a cybersquatter.

There is no one size fits all answer.

 

[dnadomain]

As far as photo content I'm not really worried about that, most will be Street View and Google Earth pics of the celeb homes themselves.

A little off topic: would using a domain registrar based in Europe or Asia, along with a webhost in an offshore country, help dodge a UDRP on a high risk site?


In regards as to why someone would visit the site versus TMZ or just another news site, I base it on people searching Google and other search engines typing in the celeb's name, or recent event coupled with celeb name, i.e. BieberDrunkDriving.com if Beiber just got busted DUI and it becomes top 10 searched words on Google or Yahoo, "justin beiber dui" or "justin beiber drunk driving." It might only be hot for a month or so, but with so many hits, it might be worth it (?).

I guess if I had to compare it to something I've seen recently I'd compare it to planecrashes.org, where they list recent plane crashes.


BTW, planecrash.org forwards to arabs.com. :hehe:




Oh yeah, what if one wanted to make a parody website. From what I know, parody is an acceptable form of free speech, hence Mad Magazine, and the countless parodies released.

Would BeiberSucks.com be "OK"? Where does the line between the right to parody a person and UDRP get set?
I know free speech does not protect against, UDRP, but parody is a specific legal construct for this type of free speech. Which is why people can make fun of Obama and he cannot go around shutting down websites doing so. Am I correct?

 

[Traveler]

In regards as to why someone would visit the site versus TMZ or just another news site, I base it on people searching Google and other search engines typing in the celeb's name, or recent event coupled with celeb name, i.e. BieberDrunkDriving.com if Beiber just got busted DUI and it becomes top 10 searched words on Google or Yahoo, "justin beiber dui" or "justin beiber drunk driving." It might only be hot for a month or so, but with so many hits, it might be worth it (?).

The only way to get traffic from those things is to show up in the search results and I doubt a brand new site would get there in time to cash in. By the time it ranks, if ever, people will be on to the next thing.

 

[dnadomain]

Traveler, I have over 200 domains and most I am able to get to rank in about 4-7 days if the keywords are in the domain.

I think it would be particularly useful especially in "sagas" like LindseyLohanRehab.com, where the event has been occurring over and over again, and has a high probability of happening again.

 

[Traveler]

Traveler, I have over 200 domains and most I am able to get to rank in about 4-7 days if the keywords are in the domain.

If that is the case, personally I would stick with current events that don't involve tm issues, just to be on the safe side. Things that are outside the celebrity niche, assuming there are enough searches to make the effort.

 

[dnadomain]

If that is the case, personally I would stick with current events that don't involve tm issues, just to be on the safe side. Things that are outside the celebrity niche, assuming there are enough searches to make the effort.

Agreed.

Anyone else keep an eye on CNN or FoxNews looking for headlines to turn into domains?

I for one, wish I had heard about the Cronut first and gotton it regd.
When they were announcing the Royal Baby's name, did anyone try to reg it first? Just curious.

 

[alien51]

Think WhirlpoolDishwasher.com, or RugerGuns.com (not real, used to illustrate a point.)

These sites have been in operation for many years without interruption. Lucky or just smart?

The issue here, is your usage of someone's intellectual property without their consent.

What you are arguing, is that you don't need the IP owner's consent to use their identity for your own personal agenda.

You would like to make money from someone else's idea or identity. So that alone should leave you contemplating whether any lawsuit was actually your OWN DOING.

You are asking to be sued. And just because you haven't been sued yet, it doesn't conclude that you can't be sued in the future.

Most sensible businessmen would rather REMOVE that risk hanging over their heads that could threaten the stability of their business. So they avoid taking advantage of someone else's intellectual property without a licensed approval of consent.

 

[dnadomain]

Valid points, but of course, as usual, where there is risk there is reward. :wave: