Trademark violation/no violation question...

[smirkley]

These are examples only, but define my question.

Generic words dictionary words

I decide(example only) to reg DeceivedDeception.com

A currently LIVE trademark exists for the words

deceived by deception

as a trademark or servicemark phrase.

Am I inline for trademark violation difficulties.

----------

A more realistic example..

the word short for remanufactured

is reman
(common trade terminology for a type of service on equipment )

not a trademarkable phrase, I believe.

But I am familiar with the company that successfully trademarked it by way of capitalizing the M

to ReMan

as in ReMan Electronics

Am I inline for trademark violation difficulties by regging names
with the word included in a two word domain?...

Reman or reman ?

Thanks

 

[888]

I think the answer always depends on the actual name you register.

For example, American and Express are two generic terms, but I'm sure anybody will be in big troubles registering AmericanExpress.com or the like.

 

[smirkley]

I understand.

I have regged ..

and currently am using on my website..

www.RemanAutomation.com

and

www.RemanPLC.com

Two names that are in the same industry sector as

www.ReManElectronics.com

"ReMan Electronics" is a trademarked phrase.

 

[888]

First, let me clarify that I'm not an attorney...

RemanAutomation.com looks OK to me. However, RemanPLC.com looks a bit suspecious if the owner's company name is not Reman or the like. And the trademark holder may use this to argue both domains are registered in bad faith.

If I were you, I would just continue as normal, since the names are already registered.

 

[smirkley]

Even if PLC (programmable logic controllers)
are an array of automation products used in manufacuring processes in general?

Being knowledgable of the company that has ReManElectronics, if I remember right they were denied trademark for the word reman until they tried it with the M capitalized.

Otherwise it is an unregistered generic term.

Not being a lawer in the field either, I do not know the potential for implications either.

But that whole website and cluster of domains is for the most part is being developed for the generic services and generic products involved, and whether developed or leased domains, are provided in whole as services of the 'mother domain' for those in the implied generic industries.

 

[LawyerSturgeon]

Even if there is a trademark it is possible that you can keep the domain name. I recently won a UDRP dispute against Bell Telephone. Bell Telephone had a trademark on "Bell" My client had eBell.com We won.

Links to the case and news articles are here

http://www.domainnamedisputelawyers.com/Domain Name Dispute News Articles.htm

From a possible trademark infringement perspective, there are a lot of considerations - such as the product or service for which the trademark is obtained - your usage, etc, etc. It is a complex issue.

Hope it helps

Stephen H. Sturgeon, Esq
DomainEsq.com

 

[cxz]

SS did it cost you anything?

 

[WildCard]

What do you mean, did it cost him anything? He won and he was the lawyer (see the Esq after his name). He also said that the owner of the domain was his client.

-WC-

 

[Ari Goldberger]

Domain Name disputes always depend on the specific facts of the case. If the mark is a descriptive term you have a strong chance of prevailing. The trademark is only 1/3 of complainant's burden under the UDRP. The tm owner still must prove the domain owner's lack of legitimate interest in the domain name, as well as registration and use in bad faith.

If a term is common to an industry, and the domain name is used in connection with that industry, the domain name owner can prevail on the grounds of legitimate interest.

A couple examples are:

theinjurylawyers.com:
http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/2001/d2001-0711.html

waterfrontliving.com
http://www.arbforum.com/domains/decisions/102179.htm

 

[trent2275]

rrrriiiiigggghhhhtttttt