Possible Problems

[Lats]

I recently purchased blastor.com as I thought it sounded like a catchy name.

I set up a dummy site for it and have so far received over 300 uniques which I thought was quite strange considering it's only been up for about 10 days.

Searching on Google reveals that it's some sort of toy.

Does anybody believe that I could have a possible problem here with trademarks etc?


Lats...

 

[domainduck]

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but if the registrant of Blastor.com were to violate the 'Blastor' trademark, sh/e may
require legal counsel.

Here are the trademark details:

Typed Drawing

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Word Mark BLASTOR
Goods and Services IC 003. US 001 004 006 050 051 052. G & S: HAIR CARE PRODUCTS, NAMELY, SHAMPOO, SHAMPOO WITH NON-PERMANENT HAIR COLORING, CONDITIONER, CONDITIONER WITH NON-PERMANENT HAIR COLORING, POMADES, HAIR SHINE ENHANCER PRODUCTS, NAMELY HAIR GELS, HAIR LOTIONS, HAIR SERUMS, HAIR LIGHTENER AND BLEACHING PREPARATIONS, HAIR SPRAY, MOUSSE, GELS, HAIRSTYLING LOTIONS, PERMANENT HAIR COLOR PRODUCTS, NAMELY HAIR DYES AND PIGMENTS, PERMANENT WAVING PREPARATIONS and HAIR RELAXERS
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 76286468
Filing Date July 17, 2001
Filed ITU FILED AS ITU
Published for Opposition November 27, 2001
Owner (APPLICANT) Artec Systems Group, Inc. CORPORATION NEW YORK 99 Seaview Boulevard Port Washington NEW YORK 110504632
Attorney of Record DAVID B. KIRSCHSTEIN
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can go to the USPTO to see all of the information. Here's the link:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/menu/tm.html

1. Click on the left menu when you get there - Search TESS

2. Click on the Top Link - New User Form Search (Basic)

3. Search for blastor

quack, domainduck

 

with it being a new tm they might well try to flex their muscle once they are granted full registered status.

it seems like a logical variation of the generic term blaster (like tourisma.com/tourism) - but if they do come at you "all guns blazing" you'd need to have luck on your side at udrp.


this is some of the decision wording from the tourisma.com udrp case and may or may not be useful:

"Clearly, the word "Tourisma" is a variant of the word "tourism" which (in English and other languages) is a well-known and widely used word. It is not, so far as the Panel can see, contended by either party that the word "Tourisma" itself has any meaning in any language. It nevertheless seems to the Panel to be a word that could have been independently derived by more than one person and is in any event either generic or very close to being generic when used in relation to travel services. Whether it was in fact independently derived by the Respondent is in issue."

"It should also be mentioned that, even if the Respondent did know of the Complainant’s business, questions might arise as to what extent a business carried out under or by reference to what might be said to be a generic or almost generic word entitles the proprietor of such a business to assert that any registration by a third party of a domain name using the word necessarily constitutes "bad faith"."

"The subsequent suggestion by the Respondent that he might sell the name for US $75,000 or more was in response to a clear request from the Complainant stating "do you have plans with it, or is it possible to buy it?" The Panel is not in any event satisfied the offer to sell was made in bad faith but it certainly does not establish that the original registration was made in bad faith."

 

[dmyre]

It's my understanding that a TM name can still be used as long as it's not being used for a similar product.

i.e. apple computers, apple orthodontics, etc

Please correct me if I am wrong...

 

[Lats]

Thanks for the replies, much appreciated.

Here I was worried about the toy manufacturer, perhaps I should now be worried about the 'hair' industry checking the domain out - thanks Duck!


Lats...

 

[domainduck]

I have found that when a potential buyer asks about a domain name of mine that is trademarked and I send a trademark disclaimer first, the negotiation ends. It's a problem, because most people think that a trademark always means trouble when in fact, it doesn't - example: www.Smallville.com. Without the trademark disclaimer, I am deceptive. Does anyone else send trademark disclaimers, or do you just take the money and run?

quack, domainduck

 

like brn2h8 said, the problem is that trademarks may well not be infringed through usage of the buyer if their usage class is different to that of the trademark holder.

I pass responsibility for ip checking to the buyer on my invoices. The udrp is the most likely venue for tm problems, and their recourse is only with the current domain holder - and if it goes to court then "real" tm law comes into force with classes of usage etc.

 

[heatfan]

How about with domains that have 2 or 3 generic words in it ?

How are trademarks vs domain handeled in this case...

Thanks !