.UK Announced

[grantw]

Could some please clarify something for me in a hypothetical situation.

If I owned 'loans.co.uk' but I did not have a TM for it, I understand I would lose out to anyone with a TM in this field for that exact word.

But of if there was no 'EXACT' TM for 'loans' but there are 151 TM's where 'loans' is contained in the TM (say for examples Quick Loans) does that mean they have a TM for 'loans' and can go for the .uk domain if they wanted ?

Hope it makes sense. Thanks

It has to be the exact term as far as I'm aware.

Grant

 

[grantw]

From the LL sunrise:

"During this time trade mark rights holders can apply for a domain that matches their trade mark"

Grant

 

[domainseller200]

It has to be the exact term as far as I'm aware.

Grant

Thanks Grant - That is my understanding of it, so if worst comes to the worst I hope it is correct !

 

[websaway]

Surely because so many trademarks were filed in 2009 by one individual company, there would have to be some kind of enquiry to establish if they resulted from inside information, some people must suspect foul play.
All the major one word .uk generics will fall into one companies hands and that should be enough to question the rules.

 

[Edwin]

Surely because so many trademarks were filed in 2009 by one individual company, there would have to be some kind of enquiry to establish if they resulted from inside information, some people must suspect foul play.
All the major one word .uk generics will fall into one companies hands and that should be enough to question the rules.

The danger in this whole process is to assume that rationality will prevail "automatically".

In practice, nothing at all will happen unless people notice issues and bring them to public attention and/or seek legal redress. Nominet are NEVER going to pro-actively put their hand up and say "Wait a minute, we've got egg all over our face because one entity has 200 TMs therefore our TM Sunrise policy is junk - how silly we must look (ha ha)". You cannot possibly expect them to self-police in that way.

It's instructive to see that of the 31 press articles published in the wake of Nominet's initial announcement (some in MAJOR media outlets) precisely ZERO dug into the actual meat of the proposal (with the issues like TM precedence, prospect of .co.uk owners losing "their" equivalent names, the potential monstrous cost to the UK economy, etc.)

No, journalists are on deadlines like everyone else, and in this age of shovelware news there's no space for "investigative journalism" if rearranging the quotes from a press release and adding an intro paragraph will do. And of course Nominet made it that little bit "easier" by rearranging their whole site and deleting anything of even tangential relevance (like pre-2012 news, PAB minutes, etc.)

 

[websaway]

The danger in this whole process is to assume that rationality will prevail "automatically".

In practice, nothing at all will happen unless people notice issues and bring them to public attention and/or seek legal redress. Nominet are NEVER going to pro-actively put their hand up and say "Wait a minute, we've got egg all over our face because one entity has 200 TMs therefore our TM Sunrise policy is junk - how silly we must look (ha ha)". You cannot possibly expect them to self-police in that way.

It's instructive to see that of the 31 press articles published in the wake of Nominet's initial announcement (some in MAJOR media outlets) precisely ZERO dug into the actual meat of the proposal (with the issues like TM precedence, prospect of .co.uk owners losing "their" equivalent names, the potential monstrous cost to the UK economy, etc.)

No, journalists are on deadlines like everyone else, and in this age of shovelware news there's no space for "investigative journalism" if rearranging the quotes from a press release and adding an intro paragraph will do. And of course Nominet made it that little bit "easier" by rearranging their whole site and deleting anything of even tangential relevance (like pre-2012 news, PAB minutes, etc.)

Because of the fact that the proposals have been in the public domain since 2004 it could mean that the cut off for eligibility of 3 months prior to the consultation period has no credible reasoning and has left the whole process open to abuse.

 

[GreyWing]

We can discuss this till we're old and grey but the fact is that we aren't a credible voice to argue against the proposal. This needs UK industry behind it and if you don't want this to go ahead then you need to lobby someone with the power to not just rock but capsize the boat. Until Graeme released his document yesterday I would probably have suggested the CBI as a good place to start but given that a certain member of staff thinks we're scum, I don't think that would work.

Our friends are growing more and more powerful everyday, the more we tell that they will be victims the more help and advice we get. We have some very powerful friends now and they have some even more powerful friends. Just one of the tiny ones.... trademark.co.uk had a nice discussion with them "we are not amused", they would lose their name. I'd love to be able to tell you the big ones but for obvious reasons a lot is being kept quiet.

It certainly isn't those they try and call domainers, they have tried that game many times before and people are now seeing through it. This week could be a big one.

Plus I am getting more and more emails from Nominet everyday, we still have contacts there

 

[Sound]

How many TM owners do you think were aware of the cosy club which nominet ran allowing TM domains to be picked up by domain speculators on a grand scale year after year.

Even when Nominet allowed dropcatching some people still had to cheat the system and were allowed to keep their names.

Some of the above sounds very much like sour grapes. So someone has registered TM on domains that you don't even own.

 

[foz]

During a TM sunrise "brands" could apply, however dictionary words and place names could be off limits (as a clause).

 

[scooter]

Not if you have a trademark for that name. Trademark law takes precedence. You own the trademark to said name, if no other trademarks are filed for that name, the name is yours as you are the trademarked holder for said name.

If they did not give you the name, Nominet will be spending plenty of time in court.

If you are Sony, you will expect to obtain sony.uk (unless someone else holds the same mark in a different class, then you go to auction to see who has the biggest pockets)

Same with "mortgage". Candle boy holds the mark. If no other marks are held for the same name, candle boy has to get the name as he/she/they have a mark for said name.

Stinks, doesn't it?


.

 

[foz]

Nominets proposal also seems to contravene what DRS expert(s) state in their findings. D00010593 - workbox_co_uk.

The Complainant appears not to have received any legal advice and seems to honestly believe that offering a domain name for sale when another third party just happens to have trade mark rights in that particular term is wrong, and this is the case in and of itself without any further analysis pertaining to the nature of the domain name and the trade mark rights at issue. Clearly this cannot be correct as, if so, it would be possible to attack virtually any domain name on the sole basis that a trade mark had been registered corresponding to that particular domain name, whether or not the registrant in question was aware of that.

 

[Stephen]

I'm trying to put a full argument on the .uk Nominet proposal

on security issues of websites does anybody know if the police obtained the power to shut down .co.uk domain if they found criminals were using websites, as in the BBC story?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12429808

Rgds
Stephen

 

[Systreg]

on security issues of websites does anybody know if the police obtained the power to shut down .co.uk domain if they found criminals were using websites, as in the BBC story??

I remember a lot of Ugg related domains that had sites on them selling fake Ugg boots were taken down, this from 2009:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8392600.stm

The 1,219 sites, which advertise brands including Ugg boots, Tiffany jewellery and Links of London, were removed by the Metropolitan Police.

Customers who buy from the sites either receive nothing, counterfeit goods, or have their credit card details stolen.

Criminal gangs in Asia are believed to make millions of pounds from the fraud.

Officers from the Met's central e-crime unit, working with the body responsible for domain names in the UK, Nominet, removed the websites, which included Australiaugg4shop.co.uk, hotlinksshop.co.uk and etiffany-shop.co.uk

 

[markb]

What would happen if you had a uk website but the domain was a '.com', and other people owned the .co.uk, .org.uk and .me.uk but didn't do anything with them. Would the '.com' owner get a chance of buying the '.uk' or not?

 

[righthand]

Trademark law takes precedence. You own the trademark to said name, if no other trademarks are filed for that name, the name is yours as you are the trademarked holder for said name.

If they did not give you the name, Nominet will be spending plenty of time in court.

Same with "mortgage". Candle boy holds the mark. If no other marks are held for the same name, candle boy has to get the name as he/she/they have a mark for said name.

Or perhaps they will spend more time in court if they destroy .co.uk businesses than if a few bogus trademark owners miss out.

Many of the new gTLDs look set to launch without awarding generic domains to trademark holders.

The likes of sony already own the .co.uk, so will get the .uk either way.

 

[Marcoose]

What would happen if you had a uk website but the domain was a '.com', and other people owned the .co.uk, .org.uk and .me.uk but didn't do anything with them. Would the '.com' owner get a chance of buying the '.uk' or not?

Exactly my predicament. I run one of my main sites off a .com but bought the .co.uk to protect the brand. Fat lot of good that might have done me!

 

[markb]

Same with "mortgage". Candle boy holds the mark. If no other marks are held for the same name, candle boy has to get the name as he/she/they have a mark for said name.

Stinks, doesn't it?


.

Who is candle boy and how have they managed to register TM's on generic words? I thought this wasnt possible to TM a generic word?

 

[Stephen]

Due to .eu landrush I came across lots of USA and Canadian companies (who had a european address)
that registered many generic trademarks to get domains in sunrise
but don't know if they renewed them or they lapsed.

As uk part of eu a european trademark may be sufficient, if they have uk address?

rgds
Stephen

 

[Bailey]

Who is candle boy and how have they managed to register TM's on generic words? I thought this wasnt possible to TM a generic word?

You can providing the word isn't registered in a class that applies to its descriptive usage.

Example "Orange" for phone service classes allowed but not a cat in hells chance of a food related or anything to do with colour etc.

And candle-boy with classes out-side the generic use of the word/s = in his case "Scented Candles"

 

[DarrenTSO]

As uk part of eu a european trademark may be sufficient, if they have uk address?

I don't even think a UK address would be required, because I am not sure it is even legal to restrict sales to only the UK.