closed Sharon Stone .net

[domainAddict]

Originally posted by Duke of Earl
.Net is the second best choice to .com DA. For a fan site not a major drawback - they might even be less likely to hassle you since it's not the .com. You may never be bothered at all - and I hope you're not - I'm just pointing all of this out as people should be aware of the ramifications when they look at names like this.

I don't know the particulars of RJ's case but I noticed there is no web site at tupac.com - it just re-directs to tupacfans.com. Is that his too?

Yes, its RJs. I believe theyve come up with decidion that he can operate his site under tupacfans.com, but keeps the redirect. Something like that, but I will read the court session since its pretty simillar to my position. Maybe ill learn something from it..

 

[domainAddict]

Originally posted by izoot
If nothing else ( and theres always the legal headaches ) ..... the .net kills it. Only way people gonna find your fan site is if you submit the hell outta it to SE's and find way to have people link.

No way is anyone just gonna typein a .net of this or any other celeb name.

I dont agree. I myself many times type in .net, since most of the .coms are usually taken by websquatters and have nothing to do with actual site...

 

[Duke]

Forgot to quote "Yes, its RJs. I believe theyve come up with decidion that he can operate his site under tupacfans.com, but keeps the redirect." from DomainAddict.

So he got half a loaf and that is certainly better than none. Especially since Tupac gets a huge search number and people end up landing on his site. I think that is a very nice resolution in his favor. The decision would make very interesting reading.

 

[domainAddict]

Originally posted by Duke of Earl


Which is exactly why I said in my post "you are going to have to have releases to use their photos or...

What exactly is release to use their photo? Like their permission in written?

 

[Duke]

Originally posted by domainAddict

What exactly is release ti use their photo? Like their permission in written?

Yes, you can get a written agreement from the photographer or agency that holds the copyrights. You would pay them for that and the amount can vary wildly from one to another. In the case of our company, the stars directly provide us with photographs from their own archives as it is part of our contract with them.

 

[domainAddict]

Think its possible to contact celeb or its representative directly? Present them with the fact that I would like to run a fansite but would need some material and their written permission to use it? Would that be smart at all, or would it result just in even stronger UDRP case? Not talking just about Sharon Stone, but about celebs in general..

After all It would be their promotion, and I would even sell their licensed merchandise through affiliates ie. That should be in their interest, yes?

 

[domainAddict]

?

 

[Duke]

I don't think Sharon Stone has any licensed merchandise. Most movie stars think they are above that kind of thing. Many fans sites are run by people who obtained the full blessing of the star though, so you would have nothing to lose by trying to contact her.

 

[domainAddict]

What exactly do you mean by "EricClapton.net got me $1K"? You sold it for that much or what? What had EC to do with that..? Im interested in others experiences, since I have recently purchased another website of a celeb that I most adore and would really like it to work out. Thanks

 

[domainAddict]

bump. thanks