and silly it is ... the big dell is not after name of the company but after domain name which is exactly the same as small dells company name .... go figure huh Dell is suing small dell for 500 euros for every use of his own name on his own website .... how can this be normal ?
Last attempt to explain it to you. You cannot use "DELL" in any domain name that is web or computer related. "DELL computers" OWNS the EXCLUSIVE rights to the use the name "DELL". I understand his website is not talking about DELL computers - that isn't the issue. You can't use dell + something else in ANY domain name with a similar usage. Spain and 60 other countries agree to honor each other's trademarks. You don't need to register in each country to have protection. A trademark in the US is good in Spain. A trademark in Spain is good in the US. Got it? Yes, it looks like a big company picking on a little guy. Let's assume this "little guy" wasn't trying to be clever when he registered his name thinking he would get business by using the DELL name and confusing people it was part of Dell Computers. Trademark law doesn't say we protect the little guy until they become successful. There used to be a BIG company call Bayer. They had a trademark on a product called Aspirin. Some little guys started to use the trademark of Bayer and called their product "Dell Aspirin" or "McDonald's Aspirin". The big company didn't do anything about these little guys using their trademark. Because the "big company" Bayer didn't sue these "little guys", they lost their trademark. Now anyone can use the name "Aspirin". That is why DELL goes after the little guy.
how could he be clever ... his last name is dell and in this case comparing aspirin is also ignorant .... it is easy to understand ... if trademark dell is protected they should not let him register his company by that name. simple as that. in many countries if you register small-home business you have to register it by first lastname freelance.... and he is not using any trademark he is using his own company name which he registered. simple as that ...
Check out nissan.com. I personally think the guy is foolish for not selling to Nissan, I also wouldn't mind NIssan having the proper authorities use eminent domain to transfer the domain. Mr. Nissan is doing a disservice to the public by having a domain pointing to some hill billy computer shop when the general public would expect to get to an automotive site. Both Mr. Dells have had the name Dell for generations so that case is a little different.
The nissan case is interesting and completely different as this guys has owned the domain for a number of years and can rightfully claim prior usuage, however, I believe the guy who owns the domain is wrong in his current assertion. It sounds like the courts said you can keep the domain and continue to use it for your business (which is not related to nissan motors), but that he could not use the domain to ride the goodwill of the car company by placing advertising for nissan cars on it.... i.e. he shouldn't be able to profit off of nissan motors advertising and product or basically blackmail nissan into buying it from him to keep him from posting negative comments about the car maker. He should be allowed to use the domain for his business and forget about trying to force nissan motors into buying his domain.
Their computers suck anwyways. And they only decided to stop outsourcing their tech support when thousands of people complained, because well. While nice, polite, and just doing their job - their techies knew shit all in India.
In the US we have cities taking properties away from businesses, residents, churches, etc using eminent domain and giving the land to business to build on and generate sales tax. That is wrong in a country founded on principles including the right to private property. It would not be nearly as wrong for the courts to give Nissan Motors a domain that logically best fits their business. Nissan did offer him a lot of money at one point but he had "principles". Now he has an ugly web site that doesn't generate nearly what he was offered.
I don't happen to agree with "eminent domain" being used for business interests, but eminent domain isn't something new and existed long before the US was founded. The fifth amendment of the constitution says "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"
No, patents have nothing to do with trademarks. When you own a trademark, you are legally REQUIRED to defend against any unauthorized use of the name. Because Bayer didn't take legal action against others using their name, the name became a generic term and they lost their trademark. This is why Microsoft went and took the name "Mike Rowe Soft.com" Mike Rowe was his real name, but that isn't a legal defense, and he lost the name. You can even use a phonetic spelling or in some cases, a foreign spelling of a trademark. International trademark law is very clear - you cannot use a name just because it is your real name IF someone else was using it for a similar business before you. The law requires you take legal action against people using your name. It doesn't make any difference if it is an 80 year old grandmother or a large corporation. Most trademark holders would prefer not to be required to go after some little guy - they have no money and it winds up costing a bunch in legal fees - Fees you likely won't every recover because people with money aren't usually stupid enough to commit trademark infringement. It's always some broke small-time grifter trying to make a buck off someone else's name. People can argue that it isn't fair - that isn't my point. I'm talking about what the law says. From a legal standing, this Paul Dell guy has no more legal right to use the name "Dell" than a guy named Mike Smith.
and you still dont understand .... it is not about fair or not. The problem is someone let this guy register his company by the name : dell websites ! so he has every right to use dellwebsites.com domain this has nothing to do with trademark .... it is that guys official companys name
Look, you're wrong. "Official company name"? LOL!! You don't even know what you are posting about. Who cares if it is his "official company name" ? - That has NOTHING to do with trademark law. NOTHING. I could go into any county courthouse today and register "Microsoft" as my "Offical Company Name" - I could register "Microsoft-Computer-Store.com" right now - it grants me no legal right to use the name. "Mike Rowe Soft" was real person "Mike Rowe's" "Official Company Name" yet it didn't have ANYTHING to do with him losing the domain name - You don't even understand the basics about trademark law and are sounding quite foolish.
we will see who will win ... your basic right is when you register company by some name that you can use that name ... you even must use that name when you charge and make bill It seems you dont understand what is trademark. dell websites is not using any trademark ... he is simply using his company name
I am confident Paul will win becuase his name really is Dell. I doubt that he'll even be required to put a disclaimer, but he really should have in an attempt to avoid these types of problems. (Hindsight is 20/20) With respect to the Mike Rowe case, (re: mikerowesoft.com) from Victoria BC, he actually won his case against Microsoft. Microsoft initially offered him 10K, he refused, went to court, Microsoft lost and Mike ended up selling the domain to Microsoft afterward. (Not sure what he got for it though)
I'm not 100% sure Dell has a case in this, here is their Trademark: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=pqls4g.2.15 Nowhere does it mention anything about websites. They've got several others filed as well, but all seem to be mentioned in this one, or are completely unrelated. The closest I could find would be this one, but it's abandoned: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=pqls4g.2.111
Dellwebsites will lose and rightly so. The law is pretty clear on this one. For this not familiar with copyright and trademark law I suggest you learn more before speaking on the issue.
hehe another one ... this guy has this page for several years ... his name is dell... his company name id dell websites ... so there is no trademark or copyright involved ... no way michael dell will win http://web.archive.org/web/20010610012740/http://www.dellwebsites.com/ from 2001 ... 5 years ago ... where was michael dell then ?
yet i notice in your signature you have two website which could be questionable correct? pspforums, and pagerank. arent both of thoese terms "owned" by their respectives? and heres a question to those that may have the anwser... if a word/name hasnt been trademarked, could i go through the process of trademarking it and then be able to go to a website and demand they hand it over? i mean where the line get drawn? heres a example (a bad one, but still)... if i trademarked the word .. "internet" think of the hell that would cause... this just feels wrong... screw dell
You don't understand trademark law. Dell has the most broad trademark available. The own the right to the name "DELL" - They don't need to file for any other names that have Dell in them. They own the right to use "DELL" plus anything other word, or combination of words that related to computers or a web related business. No one can create a domain name that contains "DELL" in it if it sounds web/computer related, or it will have content in the site that is web/computer related. Trademark law has nothing to do with whether or not it is your real name. Yes, people have been prevented from using their real name in business because of a prior trademark. There are famous last name families who cannot use their name for a similiar usuage - i.e. Disney. Even the real daughter (or son) would have been prevented from using the "Disney" name for anything amusment related. Using your real name is not a legal argument in trademark law - that is what people fail to realize. It makes NO difference if it is your real name or not. You can say you don't like the law, but it is what it is. It isn't a new law, it has existed for decades. It isn't just a US law either, but one established by over 60 countries.