Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Chris's posts Post Back to profile
Top-level
Karl Auerbach

@chriswho People (especially people who own trademarks) tend to forget that the express purpose of trademark law (it's written into the words of the US trademark law itself) that trademarks are to benefit the consumer by making it easier for a consumer to clearly identify the source and identity of a product.

Trademarks are not intended to be a boon for the trademark owner, rather trademarks are there for the protection of consumers.

28 April at 21:41 | Wall-to-wall | Open on sfba.social
5 comments
MadeInDex
Violet Rose

@karlauerbach
That brings to mind the concept of trademark dilution. How many times do you ask for a cola in a restaurant? Most people say Coke, because it's the most successful brand, but often don't care if they get a Pepsi or a generic cola.

But Coca-Cola cares. They expend a lot of effort protecting their brand. In a restaurant, if they don't have Coke, the server will usually ask "Is Pepsi okay?" This serves the double purpose of protecting Coke's sales by making sure customers actually get a Coke when they ask for one and protecting the consumer's choice because restaurants can't get away with selling generic cola and calling it Coke. (Some probably do, but they risk legal action for misrepresenting their product.)

@chriswho

@karlauerbach
That brings to mind the concept of trademark dilution. How many times do you ask for a cola in a restaurant? Most people say Coke, because it's the most successful brand, but often don't care if they get a Pepsi or a generic cola.

But Coca-Cola cares. They expend a lot of effort protecting their brand. In a restaurant, if they don't have Coke, the server will usually ask "Is Pepsi okay?" This serves the double purpose of protecting Coke's sales by making sure customers actually get...

29 April at 14:36 | Open on lgbtqia.space
Karl Auerbach

@violet @chriswho The trademark dilution argument was used to try to drive ICANN to grant prodigious powers to trademark holders to suppress or usurp domain names that the TM holder felt was tarnishing their "precious" mark.

One of the most aggressive of these was the right-wing guy who owned Overstuck who tried to assert ownership, via tarneshment, over pretty much every thing on the internet that used a circular shaped character.

29 April at 16:14 | Open on sfba.social
Violet Rose

@karlauerbach
One of the most insidious examples was Uzi Nissan vs. Nissan Motor Corporation. Uzi Nissan owned nissan dot com, under which he operated several private businesses. It was obviously a legitimate use of the domain. When Nissan Motors decided to join the web, they found that "their" domain was already taken, so they politely asked him to sell it to them.

Just kidding. They started throwing lawyers at him, suing him for cybersquatting and trademark infringement (even though Uzi did not use any of their registered trademarks). They kept appealing and launching new suits, and Uzi Nissan kept fighting them. Sadly, the corporation eventually won when Uzi Nissan passed away.

@chriswho

@karlauerbach
One of the most insidious examples was Uzi Nissan vs. Nissan Motor Corporation. Uzi Nissan owned nissan dot com, under which he operated several private businesses. It was obviously a legitimate use of the domain. When Nissan Motors decided to join the web, they found that "their" domain was already taken, so they politely asked him to sell it to them.

29 April at 16:44 | Open on lgbtqia.space
Karl Auerbach

@violet @chriswho I am personally aware of these kinds of situations, not only because of my involvement with ICANN but also because our company (and myself) have had (and still have) nice three letter domain names in .com and .org (sometimes with pairs in each of those TLDs.)

(We've sold some, given some away [we didn't realize their marke value at the time], and been threatened. Fortunately we have had these since before the dawn of the world wide web, so we can play a pretty big "we were there first" trump card.)

I believe domain names are slowly fading as good trademark properties, but I doubt that it will ever go away.

I wrote this in 2017...

Domain Names Are Fading From User View

cavebear.com/cavebear-blog/fad

@violet @chriswho I am personally aware of these kinds of situations, not only because of my involvement with ICANN but also because our company (and myself) have had (and still have) nice three letter domain names in .com and .org (sometimes with pairs in each of those TLDs.)

(We've sold some, given some away [we didn't realize their marke value at the time], and been threatened. Fortunately we have had these since before the dawn of the world wide web, so we can play a pretty big "we were there...

29 April at 16:59 | Open on sfba.social
Go Up