hillaryclinton.com

Here's the link to the actual decision:

http://www.arb-forum.com/domains/decisions/414641.htm

An easy win.

Wow, I wonder how much that name is worth anyway.

What would happen if I was called Hillary Clinton would they take it off you then, Just curious

Thanks

Kerr

She's going to run!

This is a DO NOT DO if you want to setup a fansite

lotsofissues said:

She's going to run!

Click to expand...

...to a far off place, I hope.
:D

DNQuest.com said:

This is a DO NOT DO if you want to setup a fansite

Click to expand...

Huh?? And another question...

Do y'all think the original owner might have been able to keep it if it had been developed into something more than a friggin' search engine??

I was just watching something about how entertainers have ownership of their names (without having to TM) because their name is their paycheck. Do politicians have that same automatic privilege??

I'm just curious! :cy:

Lyte

Not completely true, public figures do have a TM on thier name, and nobody can make money off of thier name, that is very true.

But....

Because they are public figures, they do give up some of thier privacy and true fansites have been proteccted by court and URDP rulings. The key is, if you make money off of someone's name, you ARE using the name in bad faith. If you make ZERO money, then you are not taking money away from anyone.

Basically, you make one cent off a domain that is similar to a celebrity, then you are doing so in bad faith. But if you are a true fan, then you make no money from it, it has been ruled fans can keep domains. It's all in your actions (not intent) of the domain. A parking page can be considered bad faith, PPC or redirects are definately bad faith.

Bottom line, you want a famous name, don't plan on making money off of it. If that puts a bad taste in your mouth, then your intentions are bad faith.

I have successfully gone against lawyer of 2 fansites I have with no action agaisnt me because they have no claim of bad faith. One of the sites I have will surprise many people since the person involved is considered an all-time great in his profession (some some say he is the greatest in his field).

DNQuest.com said:

One of the sites I have will surprise many people since the person involved is considered an all-time great in his profession (some some say he is the greatest in his field).

Click to expand...

It won't surprise us if you don't tell us who it is.

I didn't know they had to TM their name. I knew 'bout others not being able to make money of their name, regardless.

Do they TM their name to keep anyone and everyone from using it for any reason?? Not even as a fan site??

Let's say you had a site called hillaryclinton.com... and you dispensed info relating to poltical issues on the site. People could easily confuse what you said thinking Hillary herself said or approved of it.. so even if you weren't making any money, they could conceivably sue to get the name from you. This is related to TM dilution issues.

Lyte said:

Do they TM their name to keep anyone and everyone from using it for any reason?? Not even as a fan site??

Click to expand...

dgridley said:

This is related to TM dilution issues.

Click to expand...

Ahh haa! Thanks for responding! :gl:

Correct, anything dospariging could be considered bad faith (defamation of character). But there have been rulings that opposition sites (***sucks.com) remain with current owners. It's a fine line, depends on how it is used.

But the bottome line is, if you are a fan, treat it as a fan, anything else and you are opening yourself up to complications.

As far as TM, people are still confused. You DO NOT need to register anywhere to have a TM. a TM is a mark or name used in the course business. If your name is how your business is run (IE- Janet Jackson), then you have a TM to that name. The name only will make money (IE- if someone says her name, you automatically thing of her name). If you start a business and call it "Janet's Hair Design" and you start bringing in revenue, then that is your TM.

The confusion is registering your TM, even though it is not neccassry to have a TM registered, what it provides is the government backing that you own the TM and you are able to better able to defend your mark (sometimes to the point of over-reaching). So don't confuse TM with a registered mark. That is where you see the little R with the circle. but anyone can put a TM next to their name during the course of business. Just look at DNQuest.com(TM), it have been using this business name for 4 years and it is my TM, but I have not registered it. If someone where to start a business with the same name, I have rights and i have a case, but if I were to register my mark, I have a stronger case against that person b/c the government said I own it.

So if you started a business "Janet's Hair Design" and someone already is using that name, but it is not registered, you will have to change the name eventually. If you are a singer and your name is Janet Jackson, you can use it since you have legal use of the name since it was your birth name. Now if you change your name, that is a different story. Refer to Kareem Abdul Jabbar (basketball player) vs. Kareem Abdul Jabbar (football player). Kareem (the BBall) sued Kareem (the FBall) because the FBall guy changed his name well after the BBall had established the name. The result was monetary damages and the FBall player had to change his name to Karim so to not confuse the public. The FBall guy said he did it in honor of the BBall guy, but it didn't hold water.

So todays lesson....

Anyway can claim a TM as long as they have a business use for the name.

A registered Mark is a TM that is registered with the government. But is goes through a process amking sure nobaody else has the mark (or similar mark) at the time.

PS- this is the simple version, there are other factors such as location, reach, and usage. But that's for another day.

"This is related to TM dilution issues."

I would disagree with this statement. It is a matter of public figures being fair game since the public figure intentiallly puts themself into the public spotlight and loses some of thier privacy rights.

Dilution would be more along the lines of allowing a name to become general or generic in meaning. Examples: Band Aide or Aspirin.

In terms of domain names, dilution would be allowing variation of your name or product to be used (or not defending you TM) for multiple different sites with a confusingly similar name. The beannie rage of years past created 1000s of different beannie sites and products. Since TY did not aggresively pursue them, they had thier name dilluted to a point where anyone could sell their beannies anywhere without a problem from TY. This actaully helped TY at one point, but the downside is that "Beannie" then was associate with any bean filled cute creature.

This is why ebay agressively goes after anyone who has "ebay" in their domain name. They want nobody to say, "well, they let these 100 sites use thier name, why go after mine?"