Enom files for dibs on "Dibs"

[jberryhill]

Word Mark DIBS

Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Computer network address software management, [...] namely registration services for back-ordering of domain names already registered and for back-ordering of interests in domain names already registered

Serial Number 78301118

Filing Date September 16, 2003

Owner (APPLICANT) eNom, Incorporated CORPORATION NEVADA 2002 156th Avenue NE, Ste. #300 Bellevue WASHINGTON 98007

 

[Garry Anderson]

Is "I have first DIBS on that" just a British saying?

So - Internetwise all over the world - nobody can claim dibs on anything now then?

 

[bidawinner]

Nothing at all wrong with this.. they have applied for word mark "DIBS " for the registration service..

You are free to use "dibs" on the billlions of other uses you can come up with..just not for a registration serviuce..

geez.. I tell ya..

 

[Garry Anderson]

Bid> they have applied for word mark "DIBS " for the registration service..

Providing they defend trademark JUST FOR THAT then I see nothing much wrong.

However - I suspect anybody else using DIBS on their domain name will recieve a C&D when they overreach trademark.

 

[bidawinner]

Bid> they have applied for word mark "DIBS " for the registration service..

Providing they defend trademark JUST FOR THAT then I see nothing much wrong.

However - I suspect anybody else using DIBS on their domain name will recieve a C&D when they overreach trademark.

I understand completely Gary..there is absolutely nothing wrong with them putting a "word mark" on the word DIBS FOR their registration services.. nothing all ..

And yes IMO they have every right to protect that word mark if others try to capitalize on their word mark from others using "Dibs" in their domain names in relation to registyering domains.

To sit here and "suspect" them of overeaching a word mark that hasnt even awarded yet.. well , that's a bit premature wouldnt you agree.

Can you at least let them commit the crime before you pronounce them guilty ?

 

[jberryhill]

Gang, it is a pending intent-to-use application.

 

[Theo]

Maybe it's an acronym:

Dynamic Internet Broadcasting System

 

[Garry Anderson]

I understand completely Gary..there is absolutely nothing wrong with them putting a "word mark" on the word DIBS FOR their registration services.. nothing all ..

And yes IMO they have every right to protect that word mark if others try to capitalize on their word mark from others using "Dibs" in their domain names in relation to registyering domains.

To sit here and "suspect" them of overeaching a word mark that hasnt even awarded yet.. well , that's a bit premature wouldnt you agree.

Can you at least let them commit the crime before you pronounce them guilty ?

I am more dubious than you about them putting a "word mark" on the word DIBS - because it is for DOMAIN NAME registration services.

As such, I am sure they will argue for others to use as DOMAIN NAME will cause 'consumer confusion'.

I would not pronounce them guilty - just I have suspicion ;-)

I believe the suspicion is reasonable in the circumstances and based on history of domain name challenges.

On the trademark itself:

To give "DIBS" for a DIBS in any field, especially one as large as this, seems to me quite unfair - I could not see the UK granting it.

However I may be quite wrong and I would bow to our learned friend John B on this.

 

[jberryhill]

"I could not see the UK granting it. However I may be quite wrong [...]"

Congratulations on your new strategy for being "right" - i.e. predicting you might be wrong.

The UK has not granted a single registration for DIBS.

They have granted three of them, to Dibs UK Ltd, 114 Marine Crescent,Goring-By-Sea,W. Sussex.

"I believe the suspicion is reasonable in the circumstances and based on history of domain name challenges."

Well, let's figure... There are somewhere in the neighborhood of one million registered marks. There have been somewhere around 7000 UDRP's, and a much smaller number of lawsuits.

So the odds of any TM registration being used as a basis for a UDRP figures at some fraction of a percent.

Of course, looking at it from the other end, the odds of any domain name being involved in a UDRP is an order of magnitude lower than that, at around some fraction of a tenth of a percent.

 

[Garry Anderson]

You have mistaken my post slightly

I could not see the UK granting "DIBS" for the process of DIBS - i.e. for giving a claim on anything e.g. for back-ordering of domain names.

There is not any trademark registrations in UK for this.

Therefore, your three trademarks are not for DIBS on anything, as such.

7000 UDRP's - and many more do not reach that stage - being taken beforehand.

So of course you believe eNom, being a Registrar, will totally ignore any domain names that have the word "dibs" in it.

P.S. On being right i.e. you have never proven me wrong on this:

The evidence is conclusive in that, to use mostly Dan's words, "the domain's have inherent legitimate uses up the wazoo".

Fact: To take domain from the legal owner when he is doing nothing unlawful is trademark overreach.

This is the *absolute crux* of this matter - yet you and others are unable to grasp that simple fact.