Enjoy unlimited access to all forum features for FREE! Optional upgrade available for extra perks.
Domain summit 2024

Report Namejackers!

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mike

Guest
Something has bothered me a long time. It is how effectively the TM lobby has coined and promoted the catchy negative label of "Cybersquatters" to paint virtually all domain registrants, and our community as a whole, with the same brush. Instead of being referred to for what we really are (entrepreneurs, developers, and grass root capitalists), we're called Cybersquatters! Need an example? They successfully lobbied to have a domain reform bill in 1999 called the "Anti-Cybersquatters Act" or some such nonsense.

I say we fight back by coming up with a catchy negative term that describes the TM lobby and their despicable reverse domain hijacking activities.

I think Its gotta be a great desciptive term (like Cybersquatters) that clearly conveys their crimes against free market capitalism.

Mix a little viral marketing about specific cases of reverse domain hijacking fed to the media, along with our new headline grabbing negative term for them, and we might be able to turn the tide on them on the media war they are now winning.

The alternatives I have come up with to describe reverse domain hijackers are:

Cyberjackers

Namejackers

Urljackers

Trademark Thugs

Trademark Terrorists

You get the point. I'll take the best ones and do a poll on it. If you have thought of one in the past or can think of one now, please post it here.
 

Guest
So help me understand Mike.

Do you believe that trademarks should not apply to domain names?

Should I be able to register Coke.com just because I was the first one to type it in at a domain registrar?

Not judging, just curious.

-t
 

Guest
thewitt, what about domains that were lost at udrp like crew.com, tonsil.com, traditions.com?

On top of that, "coke" is descriptive for cocaine and the fossil fuel - so do YOU think a beverage company should be able to "own" that dictionary word?
 

Guest
Originally posted by safesys
thewitt, what about domains that were lost at udrp like crew.com, tonsil.com, traditions.com?

On top of that, "coke" is descriptive for cocaine and the fossil fuel - so do YOU think a beverage company should be able to "own" that dictionary word?
I would have to study the UDRP proceedings before I could draw any conclusions, but I'll go back to my original question.

Do you guys believe that trademark protection should not extend to domain names? Is that the basis of this beef?

If your argument is that you should be able to buy a name like coke.com and then hold it hostage so the trademark holder has to pay exhorbitant fees to get it - don't bother. I don't buy that as capitalism; that is extortion.

-t
 
M

mike

Guest
Witt, Absolutely. Domains that are registered prior to a TM app date (not first use date) should be considred marks, Domain Marks, DM's.
That is not what I am positing at all. I am talking about how TM proponents paint domain registrants as cybersquatters, in an attempt to undermine ALL domain owners property rights and how they use threats and intimidation to achieve their goals.

For instance, a Domain Creator ( you would likely call them a speculator) invents a unique name and registers it. At a later date, they decide to sell it. They research for prospects and discover that a company has applied for a trademark for the exact same "word" some time AFTER the domain registration date.

Also, I know for a fact you have TM lawyers advise clients to start using the domain creators registered "word" on their product or service asap. Then they apply for a TM. They also advise clients not to contact the domain creator of this unique word, but to lay in wait for the day when the domain creator contacts them. Then Whammm...They accuse the domain creator of cybersquatting and extortion.

Is that fair Witty one?

That is why so many people are scared to e-mail potential prospects.

And of course not Witt, registered TM's like COKE are entitled to their matching URL's.

And Timer, thanks for the belly laugh "Just call them lawyers."
 

Guest
Where I come from, lawyers are treated with more respect. But in the world of Corporate America, lawyers are not so loved - I wonder why ;)
 

Guest
Originally posted by mike
Something has bothered me a long time. It is how effectively the TM lobby has coined and promoted the catchy negative label of "Cybersquatters" to paint virtually all domain registrants, and our community as a whole, with the same brush. Instead of being referred to for what we really are (entrepreneurs, developers, and grass root capitalists), we're called Cybersquatters! Need an example? They successfully lobbied to have a domain reform bill in 1999 called the "Anti-Cybersquatters Act" or some such nonsense.

I say we fight back by coming up with a catchy negative term that describes the TM lobby and their despicable reverse domain hijacking activities.

I think Its gotta be a great desciptive term (like Cybersquatters) that clearly conveys their crimes against free market capitalism.

Mix a little viral marketing about specific cases of reverse domain hijacking fed to the media, along with our new headline grabbing negative term for them, and we might be able to turn the tide on them on the media war they are now winning.

The alternatives I have come up with to describe reverse domain hijackers are:

Cyberjackers

Namejackers

Urljackers

Trademark Thugs

Trademark Terrorists

You get the point. I'll take the best ones and do a poll on it. If you have thought of one in the past or can think of one now, please post it here.


Mike!!

Hope ya-all are doing GREAT! (you and your lifetime mate that is) :)

hey.. i have a good buddy in my home town.. who has a law office.. he's a defense attorney, however.. his brother is an Patent/TM attorney exclusively. I am going to gather more info from these folks..
This firm sat on the winning side of both the Coke case & the tobacco case & their daugher is one of my daugher Madi's best friends..
They are good folks..

I'm gonna check with them on this.. and have more info regarding the TM/Patent legalaties.

**Recall the guy/registrant.. who reg'd HELLO.com was sued by big co's.. more then one sued him.. and the fellow WON.. the case.. cause he was not INFRINGING on Hello Corp's company TM image.. nor was he selling same type services..

I'll have to archive that link.. and post it.
it's an encoruaging read 4sure!

take care!
msMay!!
 

Guest
Originally posted by mike
Something has bothered me a long time. It is how effectively the TM lobby has coined and promoted the catchy negative label of "Cybersquatters" to paint virtually all domain registrants, and our community as a whole, with the same brush. Instead of being referred to for what we really are (entrepreneurs, developers, and grass root capitalists), we're called Cybersquatters! Need an example? They successfully lobbied to have a domain reform bill in 1999 called the "Anti-Cybersquatters Act" or some such nonsense.


The "Miller" family fights for MillerTime.com against the giant
brewery Corp.

http://www.intelligentx.com/newsletters/technology/articles/story_tech7_050202.html
 

beatz

Cool Member
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2002
Messages
1,837
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 3 / 0 / 0
Problem with TM's is..
Why for instance should a company have TM rights to the say "Ajax.com" domain if there are many companies that have a TM on the name Ajax IN THEIR RESPECTIVE CATEGORY but....there is only 1(!) . com version? At least all those companies would have a right to that domain - so it's pretty arrogant how some companies pretend "potential confusion" when in fact there are a lot of potential confusions already out there cuz they're not the only company with that name.
Same with companies that TM their domain - like sex.de has a TM on the companyname "sex.de".Well if their TM-ed company name is sex.de,their domain should be sexde.de,shouldn't it? As the .de with domains is not part of the name but only the extension so if i would be lucky enough to reg sex.de - they should not have any TM rights to that domain.Apart from the question how can generic terms be a TM at all (Apple and such)?!
Last but not least: How come and on which legal ground is it that a TM is connected to domains anyway? I mean,if there are TM's for certain categories why shouldn't i be allowed to register say " AOL.com" ,put up a site selling anything but internet/phone stuff and have it also registered as a TM for the category "Internet business"? Is it like as soon a company has a TM(and that only for certain categories!) it has the right to everything?! Like Cocacola has the right to every phonenumber in the world that would spell C-O-C-A-C-O-L-A ?! To every book that mentions cocacola within the content?!
Get my point?
Where are the legal grounds for the assumption - TM=rights to the domain(and further,to all extension versions there are)?!
And if there are,which law does apply? US law? German law? Tibet law?!
As the internet is international and not a single countries "property". So how could an american court rule about my domainname me living in germany?And forget WIPO.The fact that i agree to WIPO by a registrar'S TOS doesn'i mean anything.Cuz i am forced to agree on that cuz otherwise i wouldn't be able to register one single name as all registrars include the ICANN/WIPO thing in their TOS but domains should be available to everyone meaning it should be illegal to force somebody to agree on WIPO.Second,WIPO is not a court;although they behave like judges they aren't exactly that:a court.
I think when it comes to TM&internet&law there is so much that just ain't right - and nobody doin anything about it.Otherwise a company like Verisign could not be allowed to do what they do.
Amen :)
 

Kbeb

Level 2
Legacy Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2002
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
I had to smile when I read the article concerning domainbank TM issue. It's a great example of how crazy the laws are. It just seems they have went completely overboard the other way.

Kbeb
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The Rule #1

Do not insult any other member. Be polite and do business. Thank you!

Sedo - it.com Premiums

IT.com

Premium Members

AucDom
UKBackorder
Be a Squirrel

Latest Comments

MariaBuy

New Threads

Our Mods' Businesses

UrlPick.com
URL Shortener

*the exceptional businesses of our esteemed moderators

Top Bottom