kax.com

I am not a reseller, just a geek.

Long ago and a few states away, I got tired of having to change my email address with every isp, so I got a domain. Since I'm lazy, I wanted a short one and one that could be given out easily over the phone. It took some time and many whois lookups, but I finally settled on kax.com

kax.com is short, sweet, easy to remember, spells the way it sounds, and isn't anybody's trakemark (that I could find). This has been used primarily as an email domain... the web site is nothing and it's always been protected from robots.

So what is this domain likely to be worth? And how would I find a buyer?

no numbers, no hyphens, but contains an "x". Luckily, x is at end, and vowel in middle, so is phonetically ok.

I'd say $175

[alldig]

Based on 14800 google results and 270 overture results I would say the resale value is around $300-600. The "X" hurts.

[sgopalam]

$500.

[William9]

I really love the name, I think it has X appeal. Do not simply fax it, KAX it --- except,

KAX
Status: Registered
Primary Class: 1 - Chemicals used in industry
Classes: 1 - Chemicals used in industry
Goods & Services: ORGANIC WASTE ABSORBENT CONTAINING CURED GROUND RUBBER
Serial No: 74593465
Reg. No: 1935303
Filed: November 1, 1994
First Use: March 22, 1994
First Commerce: March 22, 1994
Registration November 14, 1995

Original Registrant
Name: ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES ALTERNATIVES, INC.
Address: 5065 East Sloan Street
Port Clinton
Entity Type: Corporation

Owner at Publication
Name: ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES ALTERNATIVES, INC.
Address: 5065 East Sloan Street
Port Clinton
Entity Type: Corporation

Original Applicant
Name: ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES ALTERNATIVES, INC.
Address: 5065 East Sloan Street
Port Clinton
Entity Type: Corporation

You decide how much this trademark info degredates the value and usability of the domain.

[GiantDomains]

William. KAX is hardly a TM. UNLESS the user is using it to promote chemicals (per the info you provided)

[William9]

I tried to leave my info for the reader to interpret, as I am not a lawyer. I interpreted that if you search the USPTO database and find a trademark on a name, it is a trademarked. I also interpreted your statement to mean that the sale of chemicals by KAX.com could be infringement.

However, the issue for this board is - Would WIPO see the rights to KAX.com belonging to the trademark holder in UDRP action? The answer to that – I do not know – but a buyer should consider it.

I am trying to tread lightly because you had an incredible story with two letter .INFOs. Thanks for pointing out your thoughts as always doberry.

[GiantDomains]

Originally posted by William9
I tried to leave my info for the reader to interpret, as I am not a lawyer. I interpreted that if you search the USPTO database and find a trademark on a name, it is a trademarked. I also interpreted your statement to mean that the sale of chemicals by KAX.com could be infringement.

However, the issue for this board is - Would WIPO see the rights to KAX.com belonging to the trademark holder in UDRP action? The answer to that – I do not know – but a buyer should consider it.

I am trying to tread lightly because you had an incredible story with Go.info. Thanks for pointing out your thoughts as always doberry.

Trademarks have categories. Thats what allows, say "Guinness" the beer, to co-exist with "Guinness", the book of world records. The reason dot-coms are "snagged" for infringement, is because company's (amazon, paypal) have been trademarked in a category for internet commerce, as well as in their respective business practice categories. If KAX were trademarked in an Internet Science/Computer Science category, as well as a Chemical category OR if KAX.com starts selling chemicals online, the trademark is then infringed upon.

KAX is not in this category.

[William9]

doberry, everything you said is true and makes sense – but infringement is NOT the basis of UDRP rulings. A review of cases on http://www.udrplaw.net/ indicates a much much much LESS vigorous requirement for winning UDRP [eg. looks like, sounds like, could be, etc.] Regardless, it will be for the buyer of the domain to consider - [Kax.COM has no trademark]. Consequently, unfair or not, the KAX trademark degrades the value of the domain.

[GiantDomains]

Originally posted by William9
doberry, everything you said is true and makes sense – but infringement is NOT the basis of UDRP rulings. A review of cases on http://www.udrplaw.net/ indicates a much much much LESS vigorous requirement for winning UDRP [eg. looks like, sounds like, could be, etc.] Regardless, it will be for the buyer of the domain to consider - [Kax.COM has no trademark]. Consequently, unfair or not, the KAX trademark degrades the value of the domain.

Armani.com WAS NOT successfully proven as trademark violation, because the owner was using as his personal wesite, and his name is A.R.MANI (see tucows whois). If he had the domain pointing to an affiliate clothing site, he would have lost. You would think a big designer like ARMANI would own armani.com. Nope. why? The reason I pointed out above.

[Bob]

Originally posted by maryNmass
So what is this domain likely to be worth? And how would I find a buyer?

Probably 300 - 500 resale. X is tough.

-Bob

[mohno]

I like it!
If you would sell it for $500, I don't hesitate to take it.
So, $500 is minimum.

[RON2]

A pronounceable three letter domain? These appraisals seem low. My appraisal is $1500 - $2500

The 'x' might not be that harmful -- case in point, some corporate usages that are similar: Pax TV, Paxil medicine, K-Pax movie

[NamePopper.com]

Originally posted by -RJ-
Paxil medicine

I'm currently taking it. Don't tell anybody.

[DomainSage]

www.WhoisDatabase.com has the link popularity.

[Tee]

It has a "k"..........

[DotComster]

I'd normally say around $300 - but in this case I see:
kax.org being offered for $600, so I'll agree with RJ on this one.

So it might be best to hold on to it a bit and see what happens.