Squatted .domains

[katherine]

Hi,

Do you know what these domains have in common:
NAMEJET.DOMAINS
NETWORKSOLUTIONS.DOMAINS
SNAPNAMES.DOMAINS

They were all registered by some guy in China, not by the respective TM holders.

It's okay you know, icann told us cybersquatting would not be a problem with new extensions

 

[Shane]

What an idiot.

 

[amplify]

I still don't quite get it either. Let's say someone registers Auto.Zone. Obviously AutoZone is a TM, but Auto is a generic term and so is Zone. Could Auto.Zone sell auto parts or is it TM infringement? ICANN was smart enough to make it a policy to reserve this particular name... just a quick example how things can get quite messy with domain hacks and "exact match" TM's.

The three you provided are just blatant TM names though.

Does Network Solutions have a claim at the trademark sunrise of Network.Solutions?

 

[katherine]

Well usage can certainly constitute TM violation when the name itself is not a blatant violation.

 

[atomic]

I scream bullshit! Hey companies, go and pay DO Nuts their ridiculous fees to "protect" your TM or people from China will register your TM in their worthless extensions. No reasonable human being in their right mind would have registered these TM's, I scream inside job to set an "example" of why businesses should "protect" their TM's in these worthless and laughable extensions.

 

[amplify]

It should have been one application through ICANN for TM protection, not a "sunrise" for TM holders. With that being said, it should have been for major corporations so that ICANN would not delegate certain wellknown phrases, especially registrars. That goes along the lines with Microsoft, Facebook, etc. Is it the registrars responsibility to stop it? Are they penalized if it happens? Registries stop it? Where is the line crossed since many "hacks" can be made for TM names.

 

[katherine]

BULKREGISTER.DOMAINS was registered yesterday. This one is on privacy but forwards to the .com.
Perhaps somebody has been watching and is taking action.

 

[Gerry]

I can not believe the registry would permit this. Why on earth are they not protecting their own?

What an idiot!

But...I would like to see (as a curiosity) if a proper site would not only steal traffic but rank high.

 

[RTM.net]

As in the stock market, the entire new TLD game is a momo play whose goal is to sucker retail investors who have little portfolios of a few dozen or hundred domains to invest in them... to then be there for the dump. Pump & dump applies to the whole domain game as well, of course. Winning the game is not easy if you're a retail (domain) investor with say a measly $xxx,xxx (or $xxx god forbid) to invest...

My $0.02, but based on experience, observation and participation over the last 15-20 years.

 

[Charles SweeneyCharles Sweeney is verified member.]

I still don't quite get it either. Let's say someone registers Auto.Zone. Obviously AutoZone is a TM, but Auto is a generic term and so is Zone. Could Auto.Zone sell auto parts or is it TM infringement?

Not a lawyer but as far as I know the Trade Mark only applies to the name part, so like you suggest, auto.zone would be ok because "auto" (guessing!) is not a Trade Mark.

That being said, if someone was trying to "pass it off" as AutoZone, then they certainly would be in trouble, rightly so.

 

[katherine]

Today we have an interesting and possibly borderline domain
melbourne.domains

It's parked on Sedo, but granted it's not melbourneit, and there are no infringing ads (for me). Interesting.