Copyright infringement or no?

Nick · 02-12-2006, 11:45 PM

Products such as Frontline Plus for Fleas and Ticks.

Is it copyright infringement to register a domain with those words in? such as frontlineplus.com? that promotes the product?

**Cricket** · 02-12-2006, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NRLMedia

Products such as Frontline Plus for Fleas and Ticks.

Is it copyright infringement to register a domain with those words in? such as frontlineplus.com? that promotes the product?

It's a registered trademark.

Nick · 02-12-2006, 11:51 PM

so No...

There would be legal issues even if I promoted it and held testimonials?

**Cricket** · 02-13-2006, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NRLMedia

so No...

There would be legal issues even if I promoted it and held testimonials?

I found an article that explains it a bit better than I can:

Quote:

Just because a domain name is available, does not mean that you can use it legally. Domain name registrars (the businesses who sell domain names on the web), are governed by the rules of ICANN which governs all domain names and has the authority to take away the use of a domain name if it is infringing on a trademark. If you read the contract for any registrar selling domain names, you will see that they all include a statement that makes you responsible for the legal consequences of any trademark infringement. When you are registering for a domain name, you are testifying that it does not violate an existing trademark.
http://www.pianofinders.com/pianofinder.htm

Nick · 02-13-2006, 12:15 AM

Man, they shouldn't tempt me. That domain would be money!

DebbieV · 02-13-2006, 12:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NRLMedia

That domain would be money!

You're just a few years too late for that one (frontlineplus.com).

Nick · 02-13-2006, 12:31 AM

Indeed. Well, there's always next time in like 95 years when the trademark is up!

krakrazor · 04-10-2006, 03:23 PM

No, it's not infringment

Wing Chun · 04-23-2006, 04:44 AM

krakrazor is right. names cannot be copyrighted, therefore you're safe with taking websites named after registered trademarks...

BUT - if you sell their products on ur site then you're clearly using their name for your own profit, as well as misleading consumers.

SO if the name in ur site is a registered trademark then be cafeful!

dominator · 11-22-2006, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wing Chun

krakrazor is right. names cannot be copyrighted, therefore you're safe with taking websites named after registered trademarks...

BUT - if you sell their products on ur site then you're clearly using their name for your own profit, as well as misleading consumers.

SO if the name in ur site is a registered trademark then be cafeful!

This is well stated! Be careful, or expect a letter in the mail.

StupidScript · 11-24-2006, 02:54 PM

In nearly every case brought before the courts since the landmark 1999 ruling for Excite against Playboy, the result has been pretty simple: If the term is a common English word found in the dictionary and in public use prior to the establishment of the company (and sometimes afterwards), then there is a limit to the extent of trademark protections. However if the term does NOT fit that description, it is unlikely that use of the term by an unrelated third party will be acceptable.

"Playboy" is a common English term co-opted by Hugh Hefner when he founded his magazine. He can only call for enforcement of trademark law when a _product_ is marketed under that same name. He cannot call for enforcement whenever that term is used, i.e. in advertisements that use the term in its traditional, common way or in metatags or domain names or keyword bidding.

In another landmark case, Estee Lauder Cosmetics won a verdict when it was decided that "Estee Lauder" was a personal name, and therefor was protected to a much greater extent. In that case, as an example of the extent of enforcement, an Estee Lauder "consultant" who sold Estee Lauder products was using the term in their advertising. The court instructed them to stop doing that, as it infringed Estee Lauder's right to market the term solely for the benefit of the larger parent company if they so desired ... which they did.

It's amusing to me that Excite won the case against Playboy ... because neither term can be protected in the same circumstance. If an advertiser wants to use the term "excite" in their ad copy, Excite can't do a darn thing about it. Just so long as there is no pretense that the third party is a search engine or is infringing on any other Excite property. Hee hee.

ProjectGreenbacks · 02-23-2007, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

Indeed. Well, there's always next time in like 95 years when the trademark is up!

Trademarks don't expire. You are thinking about a copyright.

If trademarks expired after 95 years, Coke would be in a panic right about now.

ProjectGreenbacks · 02-23-2007, 05:49 PM

Yes if you used frontlineplus.com to market flea and tick products you would be infringing on their mark even if you were marketing their products.

Now what you could do (if you owned it) is use your first amendment rights to speak out againt the company. This is how the guy that runs the Merrick Bank Sucks website is allowed to use their trademarked name in his domain.

http://www.merrickbanksucks.com/

Of course the only way to legally have a site like this is to make it 100% non-commercial. But if you can't monetize it... why bother?

ewomack · 02-24-2007, 05:51 PM

Trademarks can expire if the holding company stops using them or allows someone else to use them without a license. Trademarks have to be in use to be valid. The burden remains on the company.

If you're planning on setting up a money making site with those domain names, then forget it. The company can legally, and easily, take the domains from you. And if they possess any business sense they will.

MadEvan · 02-24-2007, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ewomack

Trademarks can expire if the holding company stops using them or allows someone else to use them without a license.

Trademarks do not expire. If the company or trademark holder becomes dissolved or deceased, and there is no documentation for dissolution of assets in place then it reverts to the state for a set amount of time. If no parties come forward to lay claim to it, then it is dissolved. Also, lack of enforcement or assertion does not render the reservation of trademark invalid. You as the trademark holder can decide if in when to litigate for infringement.

Case in point. Microsoft was recently sued for patent infringement regarding use MP3 technology. Alcatel-Lucent won there case to the tune of $1.5 Billion. The issue was that Microsoft had been licensed by one company, Fraunhofer. The problem is that two companies hold the patent, Fraunhofer and Alcatel-Lucent. Microsoft had failed to secure a license from both companies.

How does this apply?
Alcatel-Lucent had decided to go after Microsoft and their huge bottom line, even though there are hundreds of companies that have failed to secure licensing from both companies. They mad the choice of who and when to assert their rights as patent holders. This same type of enforcement applies to trademarks as well. You as the trademark holder decide when to litigate and when to let it be.

imaginemn · 02-24-2007, 09:34 PM

I would stay away from it. Your best bet is to get permission from the vendor to use the name so you are protected legally. Many do it all the time and it's not that difficult to obtain.

Many of you know that I own and run Imagine Creative Services, Inc. I have a registered trademark on "Imagine Creative Services". What this means is that no one can use this name without my permission. Now I cannot prevent others from using "Imagine Creative" or "Creative Services" but I can go after anyone using "Imagine Creative Services".

As far as trademarks go, once a trademark is registered you need to follow up with two additional filings withing the first 10 years of date of issuance. Typically the first between the 5th and 6th year and a second between the 9th and 10th years from the registration date. After that, every 10 years (between 9th and 10th year) you need to do an additional filing to prove that you are still using the trademark. Failure to do so, the trademark would be cancelled and would be available for anyone to use once it has expired.

Hope this helps.

ryukenden · 05-05-2007, 09:46 AM

Why not go for domains containing fleas and/or ticks? Frontline Plus containing domains will cause legal problems.

Go for something like Fleaandtickhelp.com or something like that.

waffles · 05-06-2007, 01:31 PM

From my understanding (which I'll admit is pretty limited) when something is trademarked it is only trademarked within that domain. Which is why we can have Apple records and Apple computers. If you're using it for anything flea/tick related then you're screwed. However, if you're using it for something unrelated and it just happens to have that name then you're fine.

Again, my understanding is very limited so don't take what I say as absolute truth or anything.

**John Scott** · 05-06-2007, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wing Chun

krakrazor is right. names cannot be copyrighted, therefore you're safe

You are confusing copyright with trademark. You cannot use domains that are "confusingly similar" to the trademark of a company.

**John Scott** · 05-06-2007, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waffles

From my understanding (which I'll admit is pretty limited) when something is trademarked it is only trademarked within that domain. Which is why we can have Apple records and Apple computers. If you're using it for anything flea/tick related then you're screwed. However, if you're using it for something