-
Welcome to DNForum.com - Domain Investor Forum, Free Domain Marketplace and a community for 45+ domain pros
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.
Tm Ns8
- Thread starter sellinbiz
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2003
- Messages
- 3,743
- Reaction score
- 0
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2003
- Messages
- 1,443
- Reaction score
- 0
I am not a lawyer (as you would otherwise soon deduce), but it looks to me that the only TMs for NS8 are both "Service Marks". Doesn't this denote the drawing, and not the letters themselves? Aren't there some trademarks (i.e., drawings) that do not guarantee their owners use to the corresponding domain names? Can anyone clarify the differnet types of TMs -- and their domain name enforceability?
Also, the attorney on record with the USPTO is Jason Rhodes. While this company may employ multiple attorneys' offices, I would be a bit leary since the letter above is apparently signed "Cliff". In other words, wouldn't that be an interesting scam -- to scare people into giving up perfectly usable domains due to non-existing trademark issues, or trademark conflicts that are unenforceable. Just thinking out loud on this.
Also, the attorney on record with the USPTO is Jason Rhodes. While this company may employ multiple attorneys' offices, I would be a bit leary since the letter above is apparently signed "Cliff". In other words, wouldn't that be an interesting scam -- to scare people into giving up perfectly usable domains due to non-existing trademark issues, or trademark conflicts that are unenforceable. Just thinking out loud on this.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2003
- Messages
- 202
- Reaction score
- 0
sellinbiz said:
"NS8" may be a common-law mark, but it is not a registered trademark in the United States.
Go back to uspto.gov, look up the mark again, and click the "Check Status" button.
You'll see:
Filing Date: 2004-06-01
Newly filed application, not yet assigned to an examining attorney.
First Use in Commerce Date: 2004-04-00
If you really want the name, you might check with one of the lawyers here to learn whether your use of "ns8.com" will infringe their mark.
- Joined
- May 10, 2002
- Messages
- 884
- Reaction score
- 0
I am not a lawyer, but it appears that you registered the domain well before they filed for the trademark. The "first use in commerce" could be a point contention, since it is the same month/year that you also registered the domain.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 756
- Reaction score
- 0
Servicemarks do not mean that it's a drawing. Service mark means that its a business offering services instead of products. It otherwise works like a trademark.
OK, the deal here is just like it is on pretty much every thread here. It's only a trademark violation if three conditions are met:
1) Confusingly similar to a trademark. It appears they are trying to establish one. They may already have one and are just now registering it, or they may not have one at all. hard to tell. So let's just for the sake of argument say they have one and move on.
2) No legitimate purpose. NS8 could have all sorts of uses. Even if they do have a trademark, you can still have a legitimate use in some field other than the area for which they use their trademark. So if they have NS8 for, say, financial services (I didn;t bother to look up their application, so that may not be it), you can use it for some other field. A trademark on a word doesn't give them the right to prevent anyone else from using that word for every business out there, just ones competing with them.
3) Registered in bad faith. They are going to have a very difficult time proving you registered the name knowingly to infringe upon them.
So, basically, from a glance, and I am not a lawyer and blah blah blah, this whole threat of filing an ICANN dispute is nonsense, because they can't prove 2 out of 3 of the things they need to and the other one is debatable. It's apparent they either have no clue, are just trying to scare you into selling, or both.
If you want to sell for the price they offer (seems low to me, idiot emailing you probably got paid more than that in the time it took to write that), agree to, otherwise tell them that you have no intention of using it in a way that would infringe on their trademark and so there is no conflict.
That's my advice anyway.
OK, the deal here is just like it is on pretty much every thread here. It's only a trademark violation if three conditions are met:
1) Confusingly similar to a trademark. It appears they are trying to establish one. They may already have one and are just now registering it, or they may not have one at all. hard to tell. So let's just for the sake of argument say they have one and move on.
2) No legitimate purpose. NS8 could have all sorts of uses. Even if they do have a trademark, you can still have a legitimate use in some field other than the area for which they use their trademark. So if they have NS8 for, say, financial services (I didn;t bother to look up their application, so that may not be it), you can use it for some other field. A trademark on a word doesn't give them the right to prevent anyone else from using that word for every business out there, just ones competing with them.
3) Registered in bad faith. They are going to have a very difficult time proving you registered the name knowingly to infringe upon them.
So, basically, from a glance, and I am not a lawyer and blah blah blah, this whole threat of filing an ICANN dispute is nonsense, because they can't prove 2 out of 3 of the things they need to and the other one is debatable. It's apparent they either have no clue, are just trying to scare you into selling, or both.
If you want to sell for the price they offer (seems low to me, idiot emailing you probably got paid more than that in the time it took to write that), agree to, otherwise tell them that you have no intention of using it in a way that would infringe on their trademark and so there is no conflict.
That's my advice anyway.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2003
- Messages
- 3,743
- Reaction score
- 0
Thinks .... DNForum Appraisal thread ......
With apologies to sellinbiz for giving vent to my humour :wink:
All the best with the dispute/sale.
With apologies to sellinbiz for giving vent to my humour :wink:
All the best with the dispute/sale.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 756
- Reaction score
- 0
Glad to see it worked out to the satisfaction of both sides.
- Status
Similar threads
