Botox.com ボトックス. com

[thegenius1]

Well dont want to but i need to finance More Idn's

Botox.com For Sale by owner ボトックス xn--pckua2at3h.com


Botox make people with Faces like this Look like this LOL


The Ovt. is appox 6k Medical Term Ovt. Bids 914 Yen very high....

Some Plastic surgeon out here will shell out Big Bucks for this

So im Considering offers over 500.00 usd PM or Post Here

Hey you just might get a Free Botox job with the Resell lol !

[Edwin]

Botox is a trademark, and one which has been successfully defended by its owner. For example, http://www.bizjournals.com/losangele...4/daily11.html

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by Edwin

Botox is a trademark, and one which has been successfully defended by its owner. For example, http://www.bizjournals.com/losangele...4/daily11.html

Botox maybe but ボトックス would not be covered unless those specific symbols have been registered either as text or a device. As it is a dot com, just doing that in Japan would not forcibly infer rights to the domain.

[Edwin]

Dangerous advice. You'd be messing with a multi-billion dollar drug company.

There are 7 Japanese trademarks on "botox", many of which incorporate "ボトックス". Do a search...
http://www3.ipdl.ncipi.go.jp/cgi-bin/ET/ep_search.cgi

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by Edwin

Dangerous advice. You'd be messing with a multi-billion dollar drug company.

There are 7 Japanese trademarks on "botox", many of which incorporate "ボトックス". Do a search...
http://www3.ipdl.ncipi.go.jp/cgi-bin/ET/ep_search.cgi

Well if those specific symbols are incorporated in Japanese trademarks, then clearly any use in that field in Japan is ruled out, which presumably drastically reduces the value that that the domain might have.

[Edwin]

Originally Posted by Dwrixon

Well if those specific symbols are incorporated in Japanese trademarks, then clearly any use in that field in Japan is ruled out, which presumably drastically reduces the value that that the domain might have.

I think you're not really grasping how trademarks work. "ボトックス" is not a word in the Japanese language, it is a coined expression that was created by the trademark owner of "Botox" to match it phonetically.

Since it's not a word, it's not possible to use it in any other field, just like there can be at least two "Windows" (operating system and the glass things that are part of the house) but only ONE Microsoft.

That's what happens if you make up a unique word and brand it vigorously - you own it across ALL classes of goods/services. If you use a generic word as a brand, on the other hand, you generally only own it in that class and related classes.

[thegenius1]

As i think about this and read the article, the trademark is on the cream , Botox is not an invented word it is a Poison, so therefore it is generic ? Does it make a difference if the Trademark is of Goods and services , and Not Intellectual Propertry ?

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by Edwin

I think you're not really grasping how trademarks work. "ボトックス" is not a word in the Japanese language, it is a coined expression that was created by the trademark owner of "Botox" to match it phonetically.

Since it's not a word, it's not possible to use it in any other field, just like there can be at least two "Windows" (operating system and the glass things that are part of the house) but only ONE Microsoft.

That's what happens if you make up a unique word and brand it vigorously - you own it across ALL classes of goods/services. If you use a generic word as a brand, on the other hand, you generally only own it in that class and related classes.

Well if you are correct, then I have misunderstood. Any third party opinions on this would be welcomed.

Originally Posted by thegenius1

As i think about this and read the article, the trademark is on the cream , Botox is not an invented word it is a Poison, so therefore it is generic ? Does it make a difference if the Trademark is of Goods and services , and Not Intellectual Propertry ?

Botox may be Generic itself but if transliterated (rather than translated) into another language, it may become a distinctive Mark or Brand.

[Clotho]

Botox is a coined name created by its manufacturer. It is derived from the term Botulinum Toxin and was created by it's creator Allergan Inc. Please refer to:

http://www.allergan.com/site/

and look down on the left hand side. You will see. BOTOX® and


© Copyright 2006, Allergan Inc., all rights reserved. ® and ™ Marks owned by Allergan, Inc.

at the bottom of the screen. Botox is a trademark in any language they care to transliterate it into (because they created the original term and made it famous)

Sorry Genius. This ones a TM.

[Edwin]

"botox" is not generic, it's an invented registered trademark created from "Botulinum Toxin" which is the name of the poison. See for example http://headaches.about.com/cs/preven.../botox_01j.htm

It's very easy to check this kind of thing - takes about 30 seconds of searching!

Added: guess we were posting at the same time. Great minds, etc...

[thegenius1]

Originally Posted by Edwin

"botox" is not generic, it's an invented registered trademark created from "Botulinum Toxin" which is the name of the poison. See for example http://headaches.about.com/cs/preven.../botox_01j.htm

It's very easy to check this kind of thing - takes about 30 seconds of searching!

Added: guess we were posting at the same time. Great minds, etc...

Yes i put two in two together about Two minutes ago, Also i just regd the name i had no clue it would be trademarkd, but im not sweatn it i just pick up эрос.com in russian a bueaty Eros.com

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by Clotho

Botox is a coined name created by its manufacturer. It is derived from the term Botulinum Toxin and was created by it's creator Allergan Inc. Please refer to:

http://www.allergan.com/site/

and look down on the left hand side. You will see. BOTOX® and


© Copyright 2006, Allergan Inc., all rights reserved. ® and ™ Marks owned by Allergan, Inc.

at the bottom of the screen. Botox is a trademark in any language they care to transliterate it into (because they created the original term and made it famous)

Sorry Genius. This ones a TM.

That is actually definitely incorrect. They only own trademarks on transliterations or devices where they can actually demonstrate use. If for example they had never transiterated it into Tamil and it clashed with something that was already in use then they would not have have rights over that name in Tamil.

[Clotho]

Haha Edwin. I guess it was so.

The strongest Trademarks aren't words that are out in general use first and then get combined and used in a way that turns them into a trademark by some company. They are words created by that company to represent their products and services. Because of the huge amount of funding it takes to make a made up word 'famous' they are protected. This process of making a word 'famous' is often a fairly liminal thing. We don't take direct notice of it. Language represents the words that are in common use at any given time. It is its nature to constantly change. Many of the words we use in everyday speech are words created by companies in our day and age. It is a tribute to the skill of the people that chose the name Botox and the marketing behind it, that it is so easy to think of it as a word for a type of poison.

We aren't trying to be hard on you genius. It is only natural that there are many seemingly excellent domain names available right now that really aren't. The reason they are still there is because other people have already passed them by as trademarked terms. Due dilligence is the key and the second part is making a point of never registering something that you know for certain is a TM. The latter part is the true definition of 'Bad Faith'.

Originally Posted by Dwrixon

That is actually definitely incorrect. They only own trademarks on transliterations or devices where they can actually demonstrate use. If for example they had never transiterated it into Tamil and it clashed with something that was already in use then they would not have have rights over that name in Tamil.

The point is that they created the original term. While there is a very slight possibilty that it may clash with something existing that chance is extremely minimal due to the fact that the original is a made up word.

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by Clotho

Haha Edwin. I guess it was so.

The strongest Trademarks aren't words that are out in general use first and then get combined and used in a way that turns them into a trademark by some company. They are words created by that company to represent their products and services. Because of the huge amount of funding it takes to make a made up word 'famous' they are protected. This process of making a word 'famous' is often a fairly liminal thing. We don't take direct notice of it. Language represents the words that are in common use at any given time. It is its nature to constantly change. Many of the words we use in everyday speech are words created by companies in our day and age. It is a tribute to the skill of the people that chose the name Botox and the marketing behind it, that it is so easy to think of it as a word for a type of poison.

We aren't trying to be hard on you genius. It is only natural that there are many seemingly excellent domain names available right now that really aren't. The reason they are still there is because other people have already passed them by as trademarked terms. Due dilligence is the key and the second part is making a point of never registering something that you know for certain is a TM. The latter part is the true definition of 'Bad Faith'.



The point is that they created the original term. While there is a very slight possibilty that it may clash with something existing that chance is extremely minimal due to the fact that the original is a made up word.

Again, I would disagree. Unless a Trademark is Universal by category and geography simply registering the domain does represent an act of bad faith, even if you know that keyword to be in use as a Trademark.

I think corporate America is generally sleep walking into Asia, assuming that because the have the rights to their brands back home, that they can interpret that as having rights to any translation or transliteration that they subsequently stumble across. That is clearly nonsense.

On the other hand some of the big boys will have done their homework and will be prepared to take on anything they consider a threat.

Perhaps it would not clash in this instance but I can assure you that if you take thousands of brands and then transliterate them into 100+ languages you will end up with quite a few clashes. What might be an original made up term in English may very well transliterate to something that is very generic and in everyday use. I think the US is one of the few countries that even recognises sound Trademarks, there are very few in place, and these would definitely not extend to any symbols that vaguely represent the sounds involved.

[Clotho]

Originally Posted by Dwrixon

I think corporate America is generally sleep walking into Asia, assuming that because the have the rights to their brands back home, that they can interpret that as having rights to any translation or transliteration that they subsequently stumble across. That is clearly nonsense.

I agree that America is generally asleep on this matter and I agree that it is nonsense that that they can just have any transliteration. The proof is in the defence of the mark.

Originally Posted by Dwrixon

Perhaps it would not clash in this instance but I can assure you that if you take thousands of brands and then transliterate them into 100+ languages you will end up with quite a few clashes. What might be an original made up term in English may very well transliterate to something that is very generic and in everyday use. I think the US is one of the few countries that even recognises sound Trademarks, there are very few in place, and these would definitely not extend to any symbols that vaguely represent the sounds involved.

A great many trademarks are not created words and clashes amongst these are bound to happen. Amazon and Windows come to mind first as examples. In the case of created or coined terms I think you will find that conflicts will be much less common. It is possible, just much less likely. With Botox for example, the term would have simply never existed in Japanese if the Allergan company had not created the word to describe their product. It still has to be defended however. It just will be very easy for them to prove. Also, If a company spends millions of dollars making a TM famous, it is likely that they will choose a transliteration that will be devoid of any conflicts. The point of a TM is to have a unique term or symbol to describe your product or service. Any clashes or conflicts with existing terms would be contrary to this purpose.

I am by no means a trademark expert. Discussions like this do make me think hard upon my understanding of things and help clarify for myself what I believe to be true. For that I thank you!

It is interesting to note that Botox.jp is not owned by Allergan Inc. It seems to be owned by a clinic that sells their product. This may be an example of not defending the mark and if it persists the mark could risk becoming considered in the public realm. I believe this is what originally happened to the term Aspirin. The Bayer corporation lost the trademark because they didn't defend it. It usually takes years for this to happen in my understanding.

[Rubber Duck]

Yes, I only have my own experiences to draw on. I researched American Trademarks a bit because of the potential conflicts with registrations like Y.com.

It would strike me that in Japan and China defence in depth is going to be required. Edwin for example suggest that a non-generic term would apply across all classes, but it would seem if you register some and not others then by implication you are saying that the term is not used in those classes and thereby undermining the Mark. In the US this isn't a problem really as registration of Marks is not obligatory, but in Japan and China it would appear that if it is not registered then effectively the Trademark simply does not exist.

Anyway, all imput on these matters is very welcome and usefull even if some of it turns out to be inaccurate.

[touchring]

Yes, but is .com japanese or chinese? And who is going to engage the chinese lawyer to defend your .cn or .jp case?

[Edwin]

Also worth remembering that bad faith domains are sometimes used at UDRP time to prove a pattern of behaviour. That is, of course, if the domains can be connected back to the same person.

So any time you have obvious TM domains, unless you specifically plan to live life on the edge, it's probably safer to get the registry to delete them so that they can't be used as ammunition in a case against you.