Hello, I'm looking to buy a .co domain, but i'm not quite sure about the Trademark situation. For example, www.money.com directs to CNN Money. Say that I bought money.co (been taken already), would that be infringing any copyrights or trademarks? I have something that is a similar situation, where the domain is registered by a big company. In their Terms they do not list their domain name as a trademark. And also, say that money.com was a trademark, is that only with the .com on the end, or is 'money' a domain trademark to the company. (New to all this, so sorry if I make no sense) Thanks!
It depends on whats the name.. i don't think money is a trademark question since it's a dictionary word. you can get money.com but not cnnmoney.com Good luck!
Thanks for the reply! Would this be the same for something like music, media, film, games etc...? These are all taken on .com and I wish to purchase a one word domain as a .co. There is a .com of my site and the only difference in the url is the m on the end of com. Could I get away with it?
If it's a dictionary word go ahead and get it! nothing is wrong with that. i'm afraid that you keep asking about it until somone else take it .
If you take a domain which matches a .com or other TLD which is a significant part of an online business which has trademark rights over the name then you would be in strife. For example, itunes.co , google.co , nominet.co , godaddy.co would all be out. If it's a generic term, phrase or word then you would be ok so long as you may demonstrate good faith.
True, but there is some special case like Android, it's a dictionary word but Google claim its their trademark.
Well yes depending on your faith. For expl if you develop shell.co and sell sea shells I don't think Shell will have any right suing you.. but If you sell oil and lubricants on it then it's a problem.. same thing for android, sun and all other dictionary words.
Android is a very interesting example. The word Android is trademarked by a fairly big handful of companies for different purposes. However, the key here is good faith. If you are acting in good faith and not trying to profit from someone elses reputation in any given industry then you should be ok (most of the time).
It's a common mistake to think that a dictionary word cannot be a trademark - it certainly can. The usage of the site is what determines whether or not it is infringing.
It depends on if the trademark holder can prove that you're creating "commercial confusion" by using the domain for your own merit, while attempting to come off as their company.
WRONG. Don't post about something you obviously have no knowledge of. Word Mark MONEY Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Downloadable multimedia file containing text, audio and video relating to business and finance; Video recordings featuring business and finance. FIRST USE: 20071231. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20071231 Standard Characters Claimed Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK Serial Number 78968341 Filing Date September 6, 2006 Current Filing Basis 1A Original Filing Basis 1B Published for Opposition January 9, 2007 Registration Number 3555474 Registration Date December 30, 2008 Owner (REGISTRANT) Time Inc. CORPORATION DELAWARE 1271 Avenue of the Americas New York NEW YORK 10020 Attorney of Record Paul A. Lee Prior Registrations 1001798;1901711;2398169;AND OTHERS Type of Mark TRADEMARK Register PRINCIPAL Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
^^ LMAO, somebody is over-examining their intelligent capacity. You can trademark any name you want, but the word "money" cannot be branded as it is far to general. Now if it was "Ed's Money" than the "Ed's" in that term would thus create a brandable term, protected by USPTO. Heres a little case you can take a look at, where an individual tried to brand "exotic birds" but was turned down because the two terms were too general. I can go out right now, start a brand called "money" and nobody could say anything, as "money" would never be considered a brandable term by neither the USPTO or any state court examining the case. http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/foia/ttab/2eissues/2001/75646179.pdf Don't post about something you obviously have very little and confused knowledge on.
Listen moron, I have over 15 years experience in trademarks and have gone to court in over a dozen cases - never having lost a single case. "Money" as well as other generic terms like "Apple" can certainly be trademarked. As I showed you, the term "money" has already been granted a trademarks by the USPTO - which means it has already gone through the examination period. People like yourself, which have absolutely no experience in trademark law, fail to understand that a trademark is attached specific usage rights i.e. a trademark doesn't give you complete ownership of a word, it grants you rights in a class (however certain terms can have trademarks in all classes like "IBM" does). Generic/descriptive terms for their normal usage are not eligible for trademark protection unless the term has acquired secondary meaning. Now why don't you write Apple Corp and tell them their trademark on "Apple" isn't valid - lol - then why don't you register a domain with "apple" in it and put content on the site that is computer or digital music related and see how long it is before you hear from Apple Corp and wind up being sued for trademark infringement.
^^ LMAO, once again, somebody is over-examining their mental capacity. That is true to the situation you are referring to, but "apple" has a very unique situation. Somebody with "15 years experience in trademarks and have gone to court in over a dozen cases - never having lost a single case", should be at least educated enough to read the original question on hand.. "www.money.com directs to CNN Money. Say that I bought money.co (been taken already), would that be infringing any copyrights or trademarks".....although yes money.com, does redirect to CNN, and that Time inc. (the owner of CNN) has a trademark for that term, nonetheless, you watch me get "money.net" put a site on it, and you (the luaghingstock) try to enforce their mark, saying "they own the rights to the word money". Trademarks are not my specialty whatsoever, as I have always hired TA'a to trademark a few brand names for myself, but It is hilarious to think that a clown like yourself would believe that the word "money" could be an enforceable brandname. I will go out right now, trademark the term "donuts" and sue every donut shop having the word "donut in it" Maybe, in 15 more years, you will get a more logically-refined idea of trademarking.
mjewel, Can I please get the trademark office you are associated with, I will definitely steer clear of that one when hiring a TA.
You fail to grasp the basic concept of trademark usage. I hate morons that use examples like "I'll trademark "the" and sue everyone who uses it (like your stupid donut example). Apple is NOT a unique case (and I see you failed to explain "why" - lol). Now go back and work on your comprehension of my previous posts, then research trademark usage rights. "Money" is certainly an enforceable trademark for specific usages. It's a fact, it is already a registered mark. If you use money.co for a finance related website, you are at risk for being sued for infringement and paying the treble legal fees of the mark holder, plus damages. Remember, it is best to remain silent, than speak (post) and remove all doubt.
Once again, you prove your knowledge is pathetically limited, even in a subject you should be comfortable with. "I hate morons that use examples like "I'll trademark "the" and sue everyone who uses it (like your stupid donut example)" Because it is a clear example of the fallacy you are trying to prove? Yes, that mark "money" has already been registered, and passed through all phases. It was handled by attorney Paul A. Lee, and by the clear example of simple-minded naiveness of yourself, it is easy to see that not everyone with "15 years of trademarking experience" is legitimate, any dumb-nut licensed can pass a trademark. Which by any-means, does not mean it will be followed through in any court. There are technicalities in any endeavor, but the logic of the case will always be ruled in favor. You are free to your own thought, but if you practice trademark law and handle clients, then I am extremely sorry for those clients, as it seems a truck-driver is handling my surgery. So please jewels, trademark "donuts" for me, and I will allocate you a portion of all the infringement case "penalties" I will be receiving. And once again, here is a quick little link I got off uspto, showing why its difficult/impossible under normal circumstanced, branding simple words, without a "unique" and "distinguishing" term. http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com...1/75646179.pdf (in case you missed it prior to) Internet clowns these days.....
Once again, I do not specialize in trademarks, nor ever plan to. But this is common logical information that has been passed to me through trademark attorney's that are leagues more competent and qualified than the posters on this board. For exact trademark regulations for your business, I would contact them (although they do charge). *note that all advice you get on these forums, is received at your own discretion and responsibility*