Labeled as question in General Domain Discussion, started by jamaltq, Feb 10, 2017
Why do you think that some domainers are still buying this kind of domain names.
Umm, what kind of question is this?
I have no idea..when someone is older, I would say it is probably the lack of intelligence,
or some of them are very young and probably have not yet been subjects to some nice court hearings
As we know, it is illegal to own the trademark domains, but you will find that some domainers still buying them.
Its not illegal to own trademakred domains!
It all depends what do you do with it!
Not all domainers are experienced. Domainers can live any where. Not all domainers care. Not all Trade Marks are equal in size power and breadth (non legal explanation lol)
This issue has been extensively covered since the beginning of domain investing. Just because a term is a trade marked, owning the domain may not constitute bad faith. There are multiple variables involved in the determination of bad faith.....As an example, if an Apple orchard owned Apple.com it would not be bad faith.
I fully agree with this. I have a Jeep domain for a personal website. I've had it for 10 years or so. Never had a problem. It's obviously a personal website, so I doubt I ever will.
What if the Apple orchard owner had iApple.com?
It comes down to inexperience and not knowing any better.
Everyone was new to domaining at some stage so I have no issues with new domainers regging TM names, but what really is annoying is when they are told about TM's and they try and convince you and everyone else on the forum that ToyotaCars.com is not infringing on any TM because only "Toyota" is trademarked, not "Toyota Cars"
I wonder if certain big time domainers have a way to make an arrangement with TM holders to have the TM holders "come after them" publicly?
but it's all "arranged" as someone who has seen such publicity arrangements. I witnessed or was present at the signing of one of these arrangements between an english up and coming female wannabe rap star who wanted "street cred" so she paid $80K to be "associated" with a famous married basketball player.
kinda like how if a painting gets stolen and recovered and adds value to the painting because it was stolen.
I wonder if big time domainers figured out a way to not get in trouble with TM holders and then via NDA sell the domain but the "Story" is that the TM holder went after them and won.
but in truth? nothing bad really happened to the domainer.
matter of fact he or she went home with a fat paycheck.
of course bound by the NDA can't say anything about thee arrangement?
End Result? The domain "Story" gets circulated and goes Viral. not you have a domain with backlinks all over the net.
I too have wondered this as all I ever heard from the experts is STAY AWAY.
We can't always assume it's all just idiots registering these domains. there has to be a couple of Big Timers regging these TM domains with "A plan".
or am I giving them too much credit? lol
I own more than 10 generic one word .com domains which were registered pre-2000, they are trademarked by thousands of companies in the world.
Look at nissan.com, thats one case
What do you think about registration of already TM keyword1keyword2 /com, but if it will be used within different niche than trademarked version?
I think there is No problem with it.
I have own the same in the past.
There is No problem with generic keyword.
I am talking about the clear trademark names, such as TOYOTA, MacDonalds, Coca Cola ..... etc.
I have some of trademark domains in the past, and I have received a warning from the official trademarks lawyers, to return them the domains.
So, I did.
Even clear tm- s can be used in legitamate way
Fan sites, hate site.
Microsoftsucks dot com, where you say that microsoft sucks. Thats legitamite way
That's totally inaccurate and illegitimate, as using any Trademarked companies name in a fan site, hate site, any site for that matter, without that companies express written consent, in relation to that companies business realm, is a trademark violation, subject to a UDRP filing and most likely seizure of said domain or domains, upon adjudication of UDRP filing. Let alone a potential lawsuit for libel and or slander. I'm all for free speech but you can't cybersquat a trademark to do so, you'd have to find another domain to get your "company sucks" point across. More and more companies are becoming more familiar and comfortable filing UDRP's against people using, profiting or tarnishing their marks. It costs upwards of $2,200 plus to file a UDRP but it's money well spent for a company to protect its mark and brand!
Iam too lazy to search for wipos, but you are wrong
Thanks for the links but: UDRP panels and their decisions can be somewhat, although rarely, arbitrary especially cases from 17 years ago (Walmart) and 8 years ago (Whizzair). Each and every case is unique and must be decided based upon its own merits and its presentation towards the 3 UDRP tenants. I said "most likely" UDRP domain name seizure. There are now 1000's of these WIPO UDRP cases and just like any court case, sometimes you prove your case and other times you fail to prove your case. Just because the UDRP of another's trademark in a domain name is not proven in that particular case doesn't necessarily make it legitimate. My point was that encouraging domainers to register trademarks even under the guise of a Free Speech non commercial protest site is really bad advice and unless they want to be involved in a UDRP filing, should steer clear of registering other companies trademarks, unless they plan on operating under a different class of products or services and applying for and receiving their own trademark in such said class!
I really depends on the trade mark.
For example if we take the trade mark "blue". Have a look how many different companies have registered the trade mark "blue".
The answer is a lot.
If you were to own the domain blue.com you would have no problem with this domain.
Separate names with a comma.