First and last names

[mat]

If you were to dropcatch your first or last name and there was a ltd company with the same name that wanted it and made a complaint what would the likely outcome be?

I was just tihnking about this yesterday, its not actualy happening

 

[FinitaryEvent]

If the company has a registered trademark, then I guess, they have more rights on this domain name. Can't tell right now but there were a few cases where companies won the like cases in the courts.

 

[Admin]

How can a company "own" a surname though, having a trademark doesn't automatically mean they have rights to the domain.

I own my surname .co.uk and I'd fight to the highest courts to keep it since it's my name so I have every right to it as much as anyone else.

I guess the thing is to be careful what you use the domain for in terms of site content, especially if your name is Michael Dell or something....

 

[rob]

I own my surname .co.uk and I'd fight to the highest courts to keep it since it's my name so I have every right to it as much as anyone else.

Likewise I know nominet like the odd eye brow raising decision, but to decide along those lines would have me with a pitchfork and burning torch outside the offices ooooh aaar.

 

[aquanuke]

IMO Nominet would favour the guy whos name it was, unless he was using it to profit from the company.

But what happens if they go to court and the company wins?

Would Nominets decision outweight a court decision.

 

[woopwoop]

This reminds me of the Dell victories (although .com's)
But didn't they win a battle with a computer consultant named Mr. Dell over related domains?

Those may be a bit more obvious though because they are trading in the same space. I guess usage is the most important issue.

 

[bensd]

IMO own my surname .co.uk - do you think i would win if i took them to court?

I was definitely had the surname before the reg'd it

-Ben

 

[rob]

IMO own my surname .co.uk - do you think i would win if i took them to court?

I was definitely had the surname before the reg'd it

-Ben

Court would be tricky... DRS... rights yes, er , abusive use?

 

[Beasty]

Court would be tricky... DRS... rights yes, er , abusive use?

In court - own name defence in TM and passing off - though that has various qualifications - bu basically if it is honest use then you should be OK.

 

[landlord]

Others want to use

My understading of Trade Mark law is that one can't TM something that others are likely to want to use in their own trade....surnames are a prime example where for example Smith can be Smiths Plumbers and Smiths Crisps BUT you could also have 1000 Smiths Plumbers. Any Trade Mark can be challenged in a court of law....The Patent Office have no legal standing but applying for a trade mark is a resonable step to get an GOOD idea of your rights.

Today a regiestered domain name could be considered as generic'ous as ones right to use his/her own surname in business.... whats important is the likeliness of confusion from the distinctiveness of the two marks.....if both marks are distinctively similar then you have a problem but if both marks as generic'ous and the representation is distinctively different then you may have a case BUT then it depends on how strong is the brand in the particular trade and the possible overlap

Lee

 

[Beasty]

Don't forget the prince.com case - Mr Prince got to keep his .com.

 

[landlord]

Mr Prince

I did not see the Mr Prince case but if Mr Prince is not Prince the singer then I assume Mr Prince wasn't running a music download page at prince.com ?

Lee

 

[Beasty]

I did not see the Mr Prince case but if Mr Prince is not Prince the singer then I assume Mr Prince wasn't running a music download page at prince.com ?

Lee

Mr Prince ran an IT training business in London - Prince the tennis rackets wanted it - it was the late 90's, so Prince the singer was not interested in domains yet - from memory I think Tony Willoughby's firm represented the IT guy. All pre-UDRP and DRS and worked pretty well for the little guy!

 

[landlord]

Found the case

I found the case on the Nominet website....this was about spanking those that unduly threaten and bully small peas hoping they can be made mushy and then canned.

Good to see Mr Willoughby likes them mushy

Lee

Just occured to me that the Nominet website has become so over powered with case law one would think that anyone can be an IP lawyer and buy a product from Nominet without needing legal representation....personally I would of slapped all over the Nominet website about gaining independant legal advice before using your mushy pea

Lee

 

[bdnvip]

There is a company that owns my surname and they same they are selling it for £600 O.N.O which in my opinion is a definite no no they have no right to the name whatsoever do I stand a chance they have had it since 2004 and have registered it till 2010

 

[DaveBeasley]

If someone was selling my surname for £600 I'd be buying it. £600 is cheaper than a potentially lost DRS case...do the math!

 

[bdnvip]

Yes, they gave me a strange response though after stating the asking price they said if I was affiliated with a company that had a right to the name then they would not be interested in selling to me. If I was to form a company after purchasing the name would I be in breach of anything.

 

[rob]

Yes, they gave me a strange response though after stating the asking price they said if I was affiliated with a company that had a right to the name then they would not be interested in selling to me. If I was to form a company after purchasing the name would I be in breach of anything.

It could be a dominer covering themselves from looking at 'abuse' by selling names to mark holders.

Sadly this is due to 'brands' not realising that people such as yourself have a right to the name as well.

Explain you are just a bloke who wants his surname and sort a deal

 

[bdnvip]

I know it is so unfair that they can hoard such a domain that they have no right to and sell it to you for extortionate prices.

 

[rob]

I know it is so unfair that they can hoard such a domain that they have no right to and sell it to you for extortionate prices.

Thats not what I said

I am guessing there are companies with the name, other people with your surname etc, why are you the one to hold the monpoly over the domain? Likewise, it is 2008, hardly a first mover?!

I am not trying to be offensive, but making the point that for a single name there can be zillions of 'legit' owners based on a pile of variables (a couple outlined above).

You are currently in the lucky position that:
- the domain is owned by a domainer and thus can be bought (if someone else with an interest in the surname had it , would they sell ?!)
- you are aware that it is for sale and thus can act
- the price is quite low so it is in reach.

cheers,
rob.