ICANN'S TRADEMARK CLEARINGHOUSE TO PROVIDE UNPRECEDENTED PROTECTIONS IN THE DOMAIN NA

[Drewbert]

http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/announcements-and-media/announcement-25feb13-en

[blackpower]

Russians will apply for ( секс.ком) sex.com in cyrillic.
They have trademark on it in Russia and successfully got секс.рф (and all other good names)

[domainguru]

Russians will apply for ( секс.ком) sex.com in cyrillic.
They have trademark on it in Russia and successfully got секс.рф (and all other good names)

So if someone (or multiple parties) has a TM on "секс", why not take the .com version now via UDRP? Is it because they would fail? Can't think of any other reason why a TM holder wouldn't claim their gold medal now.

Or was the TM on "секс.рф"?

[blackpower]

I think they have somehow trademarked a bunch of generic terms including sex and successfully got corresponding .rf domains during sunrize perioud.

[Rubber Duck]

Sunrise Period make nonsense when the IP has been nailed down for a decade.

It can only make sense if Verisign back tracks on every single commitment it is has made publicly.

This is precisely why a standard contract is complete nonsense when considering IDN version of dot Com.

Mind you, making nonsense is ICANN's main specialisation.

[Eurorealtor]

I think they have somehow trademarked a bunch of generic terms including sex and successfully got corresponding .rf domains during sunrize perioud.

About a decade ago, when I applied on TM in Czech Republic, I have been told, according to Madrid's protocol, there is no way to register a TM on a domain name, but why every "other" domain in the US has a TM on it ....

[Rubber Duck]

About a decade ago, when I applied on TM in Czech Republic, I have been told, according to Madrid's protocol, there is no way to register a TM on a domain name, but why every "other" domain in the US has a TM on it ....

Yes, but they are not valid.

A registration of TM like that of a Patent can be challenged.

One of the Criteria in Law for the validity of a TM is useage.

How can you demonstrate useage of a Domain Name which you do not own?

Even ICANN would probably understand that these TMs have no merit.

You have to understand that anything that is not nailed down and defended with a heavy battle tank on each corner belongs to an American, or perhaps several Americans with competing claims, but definitely not to any non-Americans.

Yes, they even own the stuff that don't have the foggiest idea what it means and have derided for a decade. It all belongs to them. Especially the stuff that where the registration predates their TM by at least five years, because that is their most valuable Intellectual Property being a Famous Mark and all that.

[clipper]

You have to understand that anything that is not nailed down and defended with a heavy battle tank on each corner belongs to an American, or perhaps several Americans with competing claims, but definitely not to any non-Americans.

T.com registered trademarks (http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=4004%3A121oke.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=t.com&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query)

Owner (REGISTRANT) Deutsche Telekom AG CORPORATION FED REP GERMANY Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 140 Bonn FED REP GERMANY 53113


It is not only American entities that attempt to take advantage of IP law.

[Rubber Duck]

T.com registered trademarks (http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=4004%3A121oke.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=t.com&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query)



It is not only American entities that attempt to take advantage of IP law.

Defensive.

Still under US system.

Probably felt they had no choice.

[clipper]

Defensive.

Still under US system.

Probably felt they had no choice.

Are you kidding? You are aware that t.com is not and never has been registered and this is an attempt to pre-empt anyone else regging the name should Verisign open up single letter .coms?

[Rubber Duck]

Are you kidding? You are aware that t.com is not and never has been registered and this is an attempt to pre-empt anyone else regging the name should Verisign open up single letter .coms?

And are you aware, it ha f*ck all to with Verisign?

And never been registered is debatable!

[domainguru]

Are you kidding? You are aware that t.com is not and never has been registered and this is an attempt to pre-empt anyone else regging the name should Verisign open up single letter .coms?

Hard to say if it was ever registered or not .... could easily have been reclaimed by ICANN / IANA if it wasn't renewed in the early 90's.

I thought ICANN was going to auction off the remaining ASCII single-letter .coms - whatever happened to that scheme. But then again, whatever happens to nearly all ICANN schemes. They get delayed until most people forget about them

[Rubber Duck]

Hard to say if it was ever registered or not .... could easily have been reclaimed by ICANN / IANA if it wasn't renewed in the early 90's.

I thought ICANN was going to auction off the remaining ASCII single-letter .coms - whatever happened to that scheme. But then again, whatever happens to nearly all ICANN schemes. They get delayed until most people forget about them

All but three which are those that don't find their way into registration plates etc were IANA reserverd right out of the gate.

Does that count as a registration? Well, my opinion would be yes, but you decide.

ICANN? Nah, they didn't exist, but they have they have been bequeathed the inheretence, which incidentally could be worth billions.

There is almost no way to gauge this!

[Rubber Duck]

From what I can remember, it was all down to the ability of servers to cope with large number of second level domains, so they decided that they would reserve letters at the second level so that Internt would have almost unlimited capacity at the third level.

History has proved the prevaling theory to be bollocks so ICANN is now happy to release them provided it can work out out to exploit their vested interest without causing public outrage.

[Drewbert]

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130228_icann_trademark_clearinghouse_and_domain_names/

Does it block others from registering trademarks for which they have no legitimate right?

Elisa Cooper (of MarkMonitor) appears to believe that TM law is black and white rather than greyscale.

[clipper]

And are you aware, it ha f*ck all to with Verisign?

And never been registered is debatable!

Ok, clearly I wasn't.

[clipper]

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130228_icann_trademark_clearinghouse_and_domain_names/



Elisa Cooper (of MarkMonitor) appears to believe that TM law is black and white rather than greyscale.

Well, if your job is to argue that it should be effortless and free to protect your intellectual property, then the way forward is pretty straightforward.

Owners of intellectual property, however, know that the laws are cumbersome and difficult to enforce, excepting an exact copy.

[clipper]

From what I can remember, it was all down to the ability of servers to cope with large number of second level domains, so they decided that they would reserve letters at the second level so that Internt would have almost unlimited capacity at the third level.

History has proved the prevaling theory to be bollocks so ICANN is now happy to release them provided it can work out out to exploit their vested interest without causing public outrage.

Well, if that's the case then we're in agreement, excepting the "defensive registration" of t.com.

[clipper]

Defensive.

Still under US system.

Probably felt they had no choice.

A lawyer might ask these questions and make these points:

All VALID trademark registrations are defensive. That is the point of registration of intellectual property.

This case is not one of them.

What intrinsic right does Deutsche Telecom have to the trademark "t.com"?

How has Deutsche Telecom used this mark ("T.com" - have you seen any billboards or TV commercials touting t.com - worldwide?) in marketing its services in the past, in particular to the years prior to its 2007 registration of the trademark?

On what grounds is Deustsche Telecom "defensively" claiming this name, since it has no apparent right and no apparent infringers, as no entity has the right to this name?

What right does DT have to defend against another's similar claim, excepting their US trademark registration?

---

I'm not arguing against your assertion that IP laws are .... whatever....(outdated, skewed toward the older generations, totally insane)... they are.

But it's not only Americans that are pulling this shit. And I highly doubt that UK law is substantially different than US law regarding IP.

And if you think Deutsche Telecom has a legitimate claim on t.com, then we'll happily disagree from different islands.

[Rubber Duck]

Don't Deutch Telecom own T-Mobile? I would have thought that gave them a legitimate interest.

Why register in the US when they could take out an International Trademark in Germany?

Probably because the US is the only place you can Trademark dot Coms, even if the Trademarks are invalid.


A lawyer might ask these questions and make these points:

All VALID trademark registrations are defensive. That is the point of registration of intellectual property.

This case is not one of them.

What intrinsic right does Deutsche Telecom have to the trademark "t.com"?

How has Deutsche Telecom used this mark ("T.com" - have you seen any billboards or TV commercials touting t.com - worldwide?) in marketing its services in the past, in particular to the years prior to its 2007 registration of the trademark?

On what grounds is Deustsche Telecom "defensively" claiming this name, since it has no apparent right and no apparent infringers, as no entity has the right to this name?

What right does DT have to defend against another's similar claim, excepting their US trademark registration?

---

I'm not arguing against your assertion that IP laws are .... whatever....(outdated, skewed toward the older generations, totally insane)... they are.

But it's not only Americans that are pulling this shit. And I highly doubt that UK law is substantially different than US law regarding IP.

And if you think Deutsche Telecom has a legitimate claim on t.com, then we'll happily disagree from different islands.

[bumblebee man]

What intrinsic right does Deutsche Telecom have to the trademark "t.com"?

How has Deutsche Telecom used this mark ("T.com" - have you seen any billboards or TV commercials touting t.com - worldwide?) in marketing its services in the past, in particular to the years prior to its 2007 registration of the trademark?

On what grounds is Deustsche Telecom "defensively" claiming this name, since it has no apparent right and no apparent infringers, as no entity has the right to this name?


At some point they have branded their fixed line business as T-Com:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/T-com-logo.svg/250px-T-com-logo.svg.png

However I agree that this shouldn't give them any rights over t.com, because the .com extension has nothing to do with their trademark. They should have got t-com.com.

BTW: They have re-re-re-structured and re-re-re-branded many times since then and now T-Com isn't even in use anymore in Germany. They might still use it in some eastern European markets.

[clipper]

Don't Deutch Telecom own T-Mobile? I would have thought that gave them a legitimate interest.

A legitimate interest in t.com?

Really?

Or tmobile.com?

How so? Does Xbox give Microsoft the right to x.com? Paypal's in trouble!

Does iPod and iPad and iMac give Apple the right to i.com? They all begin with i.

ibm would be pissed.

In your interpretation, Discover Card has a legitimate claim on d.com. Oh, but what about Dodge, the car maker? And Dow, the chemical company.

And none of these companies have EVER used these variabes.com in advertising, so I guess if they're American they should have no claim, but Deutsche Telecom is European, so we should let them slide by.

According to your version of IP law I can start a company called k-Business, LLC and register a trademark tomorrow for k.com that I should be entitled to upon ICANN's relinquishment of their draconian rules.

I think you're being a little lenient on your German cousins.

Why register in the US when they could take out an International Trademark in Germany?

Probably because the US is the only place you can Trademark dot Coms, even if the Trademarks are invalid.

I'm not going to defend US IP law because I can't. It's inane. I highly doubt that the IP laws in the UK or Germany are substantially different, but please direct me to relevant links so I can look them over.

If DT had a legitimate claim they probably would register it locally, then abroad. It would be something they advertised locally, at least.

But this claim on t.com doesn't hold water for me. ALL IP registrations are defensive, except for the offensive ones, and those we need to snuff out.

This is an offensive one.

[Rubber Duck]

I did not say Right.

I said Legitimate Interest.

[Drewbert]

And none of these companies have EVER used these variabes.com in advertising,

Well, Overstock tried to strengthen it's claim on o.com by moving to o.co but that turned out to be a disaster. :)

[clipper]

Don't Deutch Telecom own T-Mobile? I would have thought that gave them a legitimate interest.

Why register in the US when they could take out an International Trademark in Germany?

Probably because the US is the only place you can Trademark dot Coms, even if the Trademarks are invalid.

Of all people, I can't imagine you defending this trademark registration.

If Generics mean anything, if IDNs are at all worth registering and holding, I can only see one interpretation of the t.com issue.

Any other interpretation renders domains moot. We should be registering trademarks.

[clipper]

I did not say Right.

I said Legitimate Interest.

Fair enough.

EDIT: But don't we all have a "legitimate interest" to all names? When we talk about IP, we are talking about rights. I have a legitimate interest in p.com, since it's my middle initial, but my legitimate interest lends nothing to my claim of rights, which DT has done here.

I've found a new favorite website:

http://t.de/