As long as your not confusing the actual trademark or company with something similar to there business, people never understand this but its been taken legally many times as long as your not in the same type of business you aren't at risk like you think you would be as long as you don't cross that line, There is a few company's out there that have the same name yet different companies and some of the companies have registered the trademark years before. Example is angry birds it's a company, yet they were still able to register a new trademark and use the domain because they have two separate businesses.
If only it's that simple, Ryan. Trademark law is anything but, although some ideas can be grasped. It's arguably easier if it involves common words, such as delta. Delta is the Greek letter for change, yet it's used as a trademark also for an airline, a faucet manufacturer and a hotel. Now that one is easier, especially since their respective uses are different and don't necessarily confuse any of their respective customers with one another. Not unless one of them starts using that as a competing business against somebody, perhaps. Like I said, it's entirely different for unique and famous marks like Google. It's a made-up word deriving from the word googol or so (and yes that's been beaten to death a gazillion times), and it's so famous that anyone who sees the word Google will virtually associate it with the search engine. Don't believe me? Look up any domain dispute involving Google, especially the one where that Netherlands man registered about two (I think) for some kind of dating service. (And yes, Google is in the dictionary. Go check its meaning and see if it makes it generic or whatever.) Want another? Facebook is going after some social networking sites bearing the word book, but solely for that context while not even remotely trying to establish some absolute, exclusive use as some people tend to think. If those don't convince you, then I guess nothing will. Or you could try registering any of those and using them for something totally different than what they're essentially known for, and see where that gets you. Oh, and I know lots of domain lawyers with real-world experience if you want to verify what I said here. What I posted here is what I thankfully learned from them lest I otherwise entertain wrong notions and get into trouble.
Yeah you get my point but yes with any company with billions of dollars it's not a smart idea to screw with them because they have bigger, better and more expensive lawyers then you and they have endless amounts of money to make you go broke very quickly. googlesucks.info Prime example of what could be online, google don't like it but I doubt they would have a shot in the dark trying to get it shutdown. Here's another prime example, paypalsucks.com they have been up for years..
the "sucks" type sites are a different animal than a for profit site using the trademarked term. The law, and common sense, tells us that people do not usually confuse paypalsucks with paypal itself.
Well people could still consider it trademark infringement and they have been sued many times but all failed.
A good 1/2 of the people involved in lawsuits usually end up failing. I am not sure what point you are making. The fact is, whether sued or not, the courts have held that using a "sucks" suffix on an existing trademark in a non-commercial way is not infringement. That doesn't mean someone can't hire a lawyer and make your life hell for buying and using one.