What's in a number? 8675309

[Gerry]

Thanks to an amigo on Mobility.mobi alerting me to this.

http://cgi.ebay.com/867-5309-phone-...5|66:2|65:12|39:1|240:1318|301:1|293:1|294:50

Actually pretty clever and well branded.

An WHOOPING 121 bids!

Sure, some are most likely bogus.

But who cares.

Fun to see this on ebay.

It is still quite popular.

But, for how long?

Well, guess what...this seller just introduced it to thousands more new listeners.

Might as well enjoy the ride!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axLRUszuu9I

 

[theinvestor]

There was another thread about this... i find the price outrageous.

 

[Gerry]

There was another thread about this... i find the price outrageous.

Apparently this is a pretty well established business and site included.

The person with the area code of 201 gets thousands of calls.

I would turn that sucker into a business in a heartbeat!

 

[TheLegendaryJP]

From what I recall a similar sale was happening and haulted as the phone number does not belong to you, it belongs to the provider. Therefore you cannot sale a phone number. It looks like he may mask it as a business sale with that number being included however again not possible legally but a nice try at a mask. Whoever buys this could have it pulled at anytime.

 

[Gerry]

IF this had an area code, I could possibly see an argument as belonging to the carrier.

Even then it would be a shaky argument in the form of the domain belonging to the carrier.

It is a sequence of numbers that perhaps appear across the country and planet in all area codes.

This is a series of numbers concocted and mentioned in a song.

IF anyone could possibly lay claim to this number and HOW it is used and presented it would be Tommy Tutone and his production company and record label.

But there is no area code to define it as belonging to a specific area.

It is assumed to be 201 because the writer (of the song) says it is.

It would be like saying the number 3 belongs to Dale Earnhardt and 666 belongs to the devil and these are trademarked and no one else can use them.

Yes, the way in which the number 3 is designed and the color scheme of the design is trademarked, but nothing else.

I recall having this same conversation with a co-worker eons ago when a client was presenting a mock-up and story board of a new commercial and print media that had something to do with "3 ways" to do something or "3 uses" and the number 3 appeared in the print ad.

The co-worker said, in front of the client and his attorney, that they could not use the number 3 or mention it because (this is not paraphrased)

Dale Earnhardt owns the number 3

and this co-worker wanted to argue the point with the client and the attorney.

No one owns the number 3.

No one.

How it is used and the manner in which it is portrayed is what is trademarked.

 

[acesfull]

There was another thread about this... i find the price outrageous.

Sure, to you the price might be outrageous, if you don't have a good use for it. But it's just like a domain name. Any price is good, if the buyer can realize value beyond it's price, whatever that amount may be.

 

[Gerry]

Sure, to you the price might be outrageous, if you don't have a good use for it. But it's just like a domain name. Any price is good, if the buyer can realize value beyond it's price, whatever that amount may be.

I would tend to agree with this.

To many, Vodka.com at $3mil would be outrageous if you are in the business of FreshRoastedPeanuts.com