Membership is FREE – with unlimited access to all features, tools, and discussions. Premium accounts get benefits like banner ads and newsletter exposure. ✅ Signature links are now free for all. 🤖 Connect your own LLMs and agents through DNF AI Hub, similar to tagging @grok on X - Ask questions, research domains, and get AI help directly inside DNForum.
-
Welcome to DNForum.com™ - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars
If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the oldest global domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 45,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, using our free in-house built tools, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.
Scarlett Johansson Wins ScarlettJohansson.com
- Thread starter Gerry
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2008
- Messages
- 297
- Reaction score
- 1
The two are *sort of* one and the same. Not exactly, but chances are, if a personal name is famous, then it *also* functions as a trademark.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2003
- Messages
- 1,136
- Reaction score
- 19
Only where overreaching TM holders are trying to hold a dictionary word or common phrase hostage do I agree with you. I have no right to own 'Xerox' or 'Scarlett Johansson'.
What if MY real name was 'Scarlett Johansson' and I am, say, a personal trainer in Madison, Wisconsin who uses the name to promote herself and her business and has no interest in selling the domain? What if, perhaps, the non-famousScarlett registered the name in 1996 before the famous Scarlett was famous? Would the famous Scarlett be entitled to the domain in this instance (especially if the famous Scarlett were to TM her name)?
- Status
