Domain name copyright issues
Discussion
If a company owns a .com domain selling a certain product, but another company owns the .co.uk domain for the same name and is selling almost the same product but with a different name, does the owner of the .com domain (and the company name) legally have the rights to own the .co.uk domain?
A big
Edited to clarify - Could I hypothetically own a domain like www.apple.co.uk and sell MP3 players on there. (This is just an example by the way).
The company has no trademarks in place, although they've now applied for them.
>> Edited by schueymcfee on Thursday 13th October 17:02
A big
Edited to clarify - Could I hypothetically own a domain like www.apple.co.uk and sell MP3 players on there. (This is just an example by the way).
The company has no trademarks in place, although they've now applied for them.
>> Edited by schueymcfee on Thursday 13th October 17:02
This isn't really a copyright dispute - it's a fight over a domain name. Can't say I know too much about this, but to my mind there are two separate issues:
1) You attempting to "pass off" yourself as the company, by doing something very similar with a very similar domain name. (Yes, this may well not be your intent, but I'd bet this is the claim that would be made).
2) The right to use a certain domain name. This can go either way, depending on the whim (more or less) of the bods in charge of domain names (who's name currently escapes me). On the one hand, EasyJet (etc) have a good go at chasing down any domain name that uses the form easy*. On the other hand, there's a BBC.ca that the BBC (our BBC) tried and failed to wrestle from the current holders.
Sorry it's all a bit vague, but this is an answer pieced together from stuff that I've read from time to time, rather than anything specific. I am not a lawyer, etc, etc.
Dan
>> Edited by DanL on Thursday 13th October 17:28
1) You attempting to "pass off" yourself as the company, by doing something very similar with a very similar domain name. (Yes, this may well not be your intent, but I'd bet this is the claim that would be made).
2) The right to use a certain domain name. This can go either way, depending on the whim (more or less) of the bods in charge of domain names (who's name currently escapes me). On the one hand, EasyJet (etc) have a good go at chasing down any domain name that uses the form easy*. On the other hand, there's a BBC.ca that the BBC (our BBC) tried and failed to wrestle from the current holders.
Sorry it's all a bit vague, but this is an answer pieced together from stuff that I've read from time to time, rather than anything specific. I am not a lawyer, etc, etc.
Dan
>> Edited by DanL on Thursday 13th October 17:28
It's Nominet Dan......have fought and won several domain names cases now!
Schuey...'friad not re: apple.co.uk - reasons pretty much as Dan describes.... A consumer could be easily confused into believeing you have are an official apple reseller and you could therefore bring Apples name into disrepute by ripping people off or such.
It's still not clear cut though. for instance Virgin got www.virgin.co.uk back from someone whose shop had been called 'Virgin' since before the Branson era which struck me as a little unfair. there are others (if you got to www.nominet.net/DisputeResolution/Decisions/)
you can see what has happened over time. The most recent one [kingspan flopring vs mercer floors] seems similar to your thoughts in terms of what they were obviously doing.
in reality no-one has any right to any name bar what they can convincingly argue. If your arguments are best typically you'll win!
Schuey...'friad not re: apple.co.uk - reasons pretty much as Dan describes.... A consumer could be easily confused into believeing you have are an official apple reseller and you could therefore bring Apples name into disrepute by ripping people off or such.
It's still not clear cut though. for instance Virgin got www.virgin.co.uk back from someone whose shop had been called 'Virgin' since before the Branson era which struck me as a little unfair. there are others (if you got to www.nominet.net/DisputeResolution/Decisions/)
you can see what has happened over time. The most recent one [kingspan flopring vs mercer floors] seems similar to your thoughts in terms of what they were obviously doing.
in reality no-one has any right to any name bar what they can convincingly argue. If your arguments are best typically you'll win!
This is all to do with trademarks. If you trade using a name established by someone else then you're infringing their trademark and they'll have you.
The trademark status will be the biggest point of reference in any ruling by domain name resolution service.
You don't have to have a registered trademark in order to have protection. In your example, even if Apple hadn't registered a trademark they've established a strong enough presence around that name that they have a strong case through usage.
The trademark status will be the biggest point of reference in any ruling by domain name resolution service.
You don't have to have a registered trademark in order to have protection. In your example, even if Apple hadn't registered a trademark they've established a strong enough presence around that name that they have a strong case through usage.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff