I don't see why Apple should have a claim on this domain. The reality is that it is a bit like their patent battles....the owners of this site thought of the domain name first so they own it. They should sue Apple if Apple try to use their name idea.
First come, first served. I don't understand why you all think Apple has a right to this domain name. If I buy nextcoolproduct.com. Apple then decides to make a product called "next cool product", it gives them no right to try to claim my web site. It makes no difference if it's some amazing web site or just a parked domain. I got there first. If Apple wants it, they have to buy it from the party who owns it. This is how the real world works. You can't cry to mom and dad.
You really need to read up on trademark law before you go any further.
Let's say that someone else had gotten the cocacola.com trademark before Coke did. Should they be allowed to use it? Not according to trademark law. Coca-cola has a trademark on the name and any other use is infringing on their trademark. Once you have a trademark, you have the exclusive right to use the trademark for the markets that the trademark covers. For as well-known a trademark as iPhone or Coca-cola, it's extremely unlikely that anyone else is going to be able to get the trademark - even for a non-infringing market.
Apple has invested millions of dollars into creating value around the 'iPhone' trademark and WIPO, the USPTO and the courts have determined that it is unfair for someone else to be able to enrich themselves at Apple's expense due to the possibility of confusion.
The actual owner of the iphone5.com domain is hidden by a privacy service.
Er… yes?
I don't know anything about this, I don't like it at all, I want it changed. I don't understand who these companies are (GoDaddy, the one with a cow, etc.) that they can come in and somehow automatically own all URL names and you have to buy yours from them. I don't get it at all.
We should be buying static IP addresses from the international repository of them or whatever. Then we create the name by which that IP is known.
And when's the world going to shift to IPv6, anyway? Aren't we out of v4 addresses?
Let's say that someone else had gotten the cocacola.com trademark before Coke did. Should they be allowed to use it? Not according to trademark law. Coca-cola has a trademark on the name and any other use is infringing on their trademark.
In the early days people were obtaining trademarks for global brands in obscure countries to legitimize their domain registrations. Coca cola for example may not have had a registered trademark in Ivory Coast. So people would obtain that tm and it would stand up legally but if they posted any content to the site that was in violation then the ownership could be revoked.
You really need to read up on trademark law before you go any further.
Let's say that someone else had gotten the cocacola.com trademark before Coke did. Should they be allowed to use it? Not according to trademark law. Coca-cola has a trademark on the name and any other use is infringing on their trademark. Once you have a trademark, you have the exclusive right to use the trademark for the markets that the trademark covers. For as well-known a trademark as iPhone or Coca-cola, it's extremely unlikely that anyone else is going to be able to get the trademark - even for a non-infringing market.
Apple has invested millions of dollars into creating value around the 'iPhone' trademark and WIPO, the USPTO and the courts have determined that it is unfair for someone else to be able to enrich themselves at Apple's expense due to the possibility of confusion.
Trademark laws are different. Owning a trademark does not give you the right to own the domain as well. What these cases comes to is whether the owner of the domain is using it to deceive and trick people into thinking the website is part of the trademark holder business.
I personally don't feel comfortable about corporations having the power to claim ownership by force for any domain that contain their product name. If anything they should pay for it the same way they pay for trademarks in other countries when they acquire them.
I don't know anything about this, I don't like it at all, I want it changed. I don't understand who these companies are (GoDaddy, the one with a cow, etc.) that they can come in and somehow automatically own all URL names and you have to buy yours from them. I don't get it at all.
We should be buying static IP addresses from the international repository of them or whatever. Then we create the name by which that IP is known.
And when's the world going to shift to IPv6, anyway? Aren't we out of v4 addresses?
You need to study up on how DNS works and no we are not out of ipv4. I just took possession of another class C from Cox. They are in short supply though so you need to justify your need for them ar Arin.
In addition the people who have control of the ipv4 classes will automatically have possession of the expanded ipv6 IPs under those classes so although there are more iPs the same people control them
First come, first served. I don't understand why you all think Apple has a right to this domain name. If I buy nextcoolproduct.com. Apple then decides to make a product called "next cool product", it gives them no right to try to claim my web site. It makes no difference if it's some amazing web site or just a parked domain. I got there first. If Apple wants it, they have to buy it from the party who owns it. This is how the real world works. You can't cry to mom and dad.
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottleworks
Oh, and which preteen here wants to make the first "troll" claim on my comment? Preemptive reply: Grow up!
This is not "how the real world works." This is how children see the world.
"First come first served" is an inherently childish, selfish concept. It's right up there with "finders keepers."
Umm.... "inherently"? 'First come first served' (assuming it was done legally and legitimately, registered properly, put to use in good faith, etc) is the basis for a great deal of IP law.
'Finders keepers' also has legal standing in many instances, depending on circumstances (e.g., if the original owner does not turn up before some reasonable period of time elapses).
First come, first served. I don't understand why you all think Apple has a right to this domain name. If I buy nextcoolproduct.com. Apple then decides to make a product called "next cool product", it gives them no right to try to claim my web site. It makes no difference if it's some amazing web site or just a parked domain. I got there first. If Apple wants it, they have to buy it from the party who owns it. This is how the real world works. You can't cry to mom and dad.
The first iPhone was unveiled on January 9, 2007.
iPhone5.com was registered 13 months later so Apple didn't happen to use a copyrighted name that this guy already owned the domain for, it was the other way around.
It was probably just the lowest available number after the word iphone.
The fact that Apple didn't register it would tell me that they aren't going to call it iphone 5.
However, it's still a copyrighted name so unless it was registered before the announcement of the iphone, Apple deserve the site.
They are just protecting what is theirs.
You know whoever registered iphone5.com just wanted Apple to buy it and make an easy buck.
You know whoever registered iphone5.com just wanted Apple to buy it and make an easy buck.
That worked for a while but doesn't any longer. It was a lot like Dodge City in the 1800s when people could get names for nada and hold up the company with the trademark. No more gunslinger and no more holdups, a new law came to town.
You need to study up on how DNS works and no we are not out of ipv4. I just took possession of another class C from Cox. They are in short supply though so you need to justify your need for them ar Arin.
In addition the people who have control of the ipv4 classes will automatically have possession of the expanded ipv6 IPs under those classes so although there are more iPs the same people control them
IP4 actually is exhausted, as of Feb 2011. MS bought the last chunk for their Xboxes. Sure you can still buy them from Cox or some other telco, but exhausted they are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv4_address_exhaustion
First come, first served. I don't understand why you all think Apple has a right to this domain name. If I buy nextcoolproduct.com. Apple then decides to make a product called "next cool product", it gives them no right to try to claim my web site. It makes no difference if it's some amazing web site or just a parked domain. I got there first. If Apple wants it, they have to buy it from the party who owns it. This is how the real world works. You can't cry to mom and dad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottleworks
Oh, and which preteen here wants to make the first "troll" claim on my comment? Preemptive reply: Grow up!
Funny, when I read your first post I thought it was a preteen who wrote it. The "first come, first served" as pointed out already is the giveaway.
I hate domain squatters so I'll smile when Apple successfully gets this domain (which they will). Nothing wrong with coming up with some clever domain names and registering them hoping they're worth money down the road. But people who register domains that comprise obvious trademarks are a$$holes, IMO.
Funny, when I read your first post I thought it was a preteen who wrote it. The "first come, first served" as pointed out already is the giveaway.
I hate domain squatters so I'll smile when Apple successfully gets this domain (which they will). Nothing wrong with coming up with some clever domain names and registering them hoping they're worth money down the road. But people who register domains that comprise obvious trademarks are a$$holes, IMO.
Son, do your homework first. The domain name was registered before Apple had the trademark and the owner of the domain name is using the site for an online forum. Now, go to sleep. You're up way past bed time.
Son, do your homework first. The domain name was registered before Apple had the trademark and the owner of the domain name is using the site for an online forum. Now, go to sleep. You're up way past bed time.
I could be dumb, but didn't Apple have the iPhone trademark before 2008? Like, you know, in 2007 after it was announced and the spat with Cisco was resolved?
First come, first served. I don't understand why you all think Apple has a right to this domain name. If I buy nextcoolproduct.com. Apple then decides to make a product called "next cool product", it gives them no right to try to claim my web site. It makes no difference if it's some amazing web site or just a parked domain. I got there first. If Apple wants it, they have to buy it from the party who owns it. This is how the real world works. You can't cry to mom and dad.
Okay - but then - if Apple wants to buy that domain from you - the sale price should be based not on what the value is to Apple but the value to you. What would you lose in revenue, marketing, etc if you lost a domain that you parked. And if your answer is, oh no, if it is worth millions of dollars to Apple then they should pay - then you are right back to the only reason you claimed it is in order to gouge the company who has a stronger claim.
a case such as iphone5 - unless it was registered prior to the original release of the iPhone - then it is a pretty weak argument that anyone but Apple is entitled to use it. If you did iPhoneFive.com perhaps Apple might have a harder time claiming that rights to that.
a case where you actually have a product or a company etc - didn't Avaya have an iPhone prior to Apple using that name - where you have already invested time and money and have a product - then Apple (or whoever the company is) should have to pay more if they want to buy the rights from you.
I don't know anything about this, I don't like it at all, I want it changed. I don't understand who these companies are (GoDaddy, the one with a cow, etc.) that they can come in and somehow automatically own all URL names and you have to buy yours from them. I don't get it at all.
We should be buying static IP addresses from the international repository of them or whatever. Then we create the name by which that IP is known.
And when's the world going to shift to IPv6, anyway? Aren't we out of v4 addresses?
IPv6 World Day II is next month so update your routers now and play World of Warcraft over the new Internet! Be the first guy on your block with your very own /48!!!!
APNIC is completely out. ARIN thinks they have enough to get through 2013, RIPE is running short along with the other RIRs and have scaled way back in the number and size of allocations assigned. MS recently paid about millions ($11 per IP) in a bankruptcy auction from Nortel for their old blocks and still had to seek ARIN approval to keep them (justify need within current usage policy). IPv6 to the homes is a must but seems like more of a 2013 target. Apple's Airport base stations are pretty highly rated, btw. Fortunately most of the junk on The Net is hosted in the US with bigger content delivery more regionalized. I'll be quite happy when networks addresses are not a constrained resource for providers.
On the previous stuff, IPs and domains are independent of one another. But companies like GoDaddy are agents and service bundlers to make things easier for the smaller entities wanting to get in. Seems like a bit of a slimy racket with them registering any name they can think of and then selling it at a premium + maintenance... But good business is where you find it, right? It's their ads I really can't stand.
Holders of trademarks and copyrights will win out; they just have to prove it. The smart money is in guessing the name of a product not yet on the market where there's no priors like if I was smart enough to have owned "iBooks.com"
I could be dumb, but didn't Apple have the iPhone trademark before 2008? Like, you know, in 2007 after it was announced and the spat with Cisco was resolved?
I think that was with "IOS" and "iOS". Apple paid.
Trademark laws are different. Owning a trademark does not give you the right to own the domain as well. What these cases comes to is whether the owner of the domain is using it to deceive and trick people into thinking the website is part of the trademark holder business.
I personally don't feel comfortable about corporations having the power to claim ownership by force for any domain that contain their product name. If anything they should pay for it the same way they pay for trademarks in other countries when they acquire them.
I didn't say that owning a trademark would automatically give you rights to the domain name.
However, for a strong trademark, it COULD prevent someone else from legally obtaining the rights (or, more accurately, they could obtain the rights, but when you filed with WIPO to have their rights removed, WIPO would do so).
Comments
The minimum amount of the offer has to be equal to the cost of registration paid to date by the party holding the domain.
You really need to read up on trademark law before you go any further.
Let's say that someone else had gotten the cocacola.com trademark before Coke did. Should they be allowed to use it? Not according to trademark law. Coca-cola has a trademark on the name and any other use is infringing on their trademark. Once you have a trademark, you have the exclusive right to use the trademark for the markets that the trademark covers. For as well-known a trademark as iPhone or Coca-cola, it's extremely unlikely that anyone else is going to be able to get the trademark - even for a non-infringing market.
Apple has invested millions of dollars into creating value around the 'iPhone' trademark and WIPO, the USPTO and the courts have determined that it is unfair for someone else to be able to enrich themselves at Apple's expense due to the possibility of confusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Some more information:
Current registrar is "Fabulous.com LTD" and it was registered in 2008. Not sure why Apple didn't just pick them all up back then…
Isn't that the name of the domain name registrar?
The actual owner of the iphone5.com domain is hidden by a privacy service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Isn't that the name of the domain name registrar?
The actual owner of the iphone5.com domain is hidden by a privacy service.
Er… yes?
I don't know anything about this, I don't like it at all, I want it changed. I don't understand who these companies are (GoDaddy, the one with a cow, etc.) that they can come in and somehow automatically own all URL names and you have to buy yours from them. I don't get it at all.
We should be buying static IP addresses from the international repository of them or whatever. Then we create the name by which that IP is known.
And when's the world going to shift to IPv6, anyway? Aren't we out of v4 addresses?
In the early days people were obtaining trademarks for global brands in obscure countries to legitimize their domain registrations. Coca cola for example may not have had a registered trademark in Ivory Coast. So people would obtain that tm and it would stand up legally but if they posted any content to the site that was in violation then the ownership could be revoked.
Trademark laws are different. Owning a trademark does not give you the right to own the domain as well. What these cases comes to is whether the owner of the domain is using it to deceive and trick people into thinking the website is part of the trademark holder business.
I personally don't feel comfortable about corporations having the power to claim ownership by force for any domain that contain their product name. If anything they should pay for it the same way they pay for trademarks in other countries when they acquire them.
You need to study up on how DNS works and no we are not out of ipv4. I just took possession of another class C from Cox. They are in short supply though so you need to justify your need for them ar Arin.
In addition the people who have control of the ipv4 classes will automatically have possession of the expanded ipv6 IPs under those classes so although there are more iPs the same people control them
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Don't you think someone at Apple would have thought it would be a good idea to buy up "iphone5.com", "iphone6.com", "iphone7.com", etc?
This is pretty basic stuff, folks.
Agreed. Also, www.iPhone5.com seems like a happy, harmless iPhone 5 rumors forum than some 'squatter.'
It's like Apple waking up one day, deciding to start its own insider chat forum for its customers, and deciding to call it....
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottleworks
First come, first served. I don't understand why you all think Apple has a right to this domain name. If I buy nextcoolproduct.com. Apple then decides to make a product called "next cool product", it gives them no right to try to claim my web site. It makes no difference if it's some amazing web site or just a parked domain. I got there first. If Apple wants it, they have to buy it from the party who owns it. This is how the real world works. You can't cry to mom and dad.
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottleworks
Oh, and which preteen here wants to make the first "troll" claim on my comment? Preemptive reply: Grow up!
Grow up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
This is not "how the real world works." This is how children see the world.
"First come first served" is an inherently childish, selfish concept. It's right up there with "finders keepers."
Umm.... "inherently"? 'First come first served' (assuming it was done legally and legitimately, registered properly, put to use in good faith, etc) is the basis for a great deal of IP law.
'Finders keepers' also has legal standing in many instances, depending on circumstances (e.g., if the original owner does not turn up before some reasonable period of time elapses).
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottleworks
First come, first served. I don't understand why you all think Apple has a right to this domain name. If I buy nextcoolproduct.com. Apple then decides to make a product called "next cool product", it gives them no right to try to claim my web site. It makes no difference if it's some amazing web site or just a parked domain. I got there first. If Apple wants it, they have to buy it from the party who owns it. This is how the real world works. You can't cry to mom and dad.
The first iPhone was unveiled on January 9, 2007.
iPhone5.com was registered 13 months later so Apple didn't happen to use a copyrighted name that this guy already owned the domain for, it was the other way around.
It was probably just the lowest available number after the word iphone.
The fact that Apple didn't register it would tell me that they aren't going to call it iphone 5.
However, it's still a copyrighted name so unless it was registered before the announcement of the iphone, Apple deserve the site.
They are just protecting what is theirs.
You know whoever registered iphone5.com just wanted Apple to buy it and make an easy buck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilution
You know whoever registered iphone5.com just wanted Apple to buy it and make an easy buck.
That worked for a while but doesn't any longer. It was a lot like Dodge City in the 1800s when people could get names for nada and hold up the company with the trademark. No more gunslinger and no more holdups, a new law came to town.
IP4 actually is exhausted, as of Feb 2011. MS bought the last chunk for their Xboxes. Sure you can still buy them from Cox or some other telco, but exhausted they are:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv4_address_exhaustion
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottleworks
First come, first served. I don't understand why you all think Apple has a right to this domain name. If I buy nextcoolproduct.com. Apple then decides to make a product called "next cool product", it gives them no right to try to claim my web site. It makes no difference if it's some amazing web site or just a parked domain. I got there first. If Apple wants it, they have to buy it from the party who owns it. This is how the real world works. You can't cry to mom and dad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottleworks
Oh, and which preteen here wants to make the first "troll" claim on my comment? Preemptive reply: Grow up!
Funny, when I read your first post I thought it was a preteen who wrote it. The "first come, first served" as pointed out already is the giveaway.
I hate domain squatters so I'll smile when Apple successfully gets this domain (which they will). Nothing wrong with coming up with some clever domain names and registering them hoping they're worth money down the road. But people who register domains that comprise obvious trademarks are a$$holes, IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
Funny, when I read your first post I thought it was a preteen who wrote it. The "first come, first served" as pointed out already is the giveaway.
I hate domain squatters so I'll smile when Apple successfully gets this domain (which they will). Nothing wrong with coming up with some clever domain names and registering them hoping they're worth money down the road. But people who register domains that comprise obvious trademarks are a$$holes, IMO.
Son, do your homework first. The domain name was registered before Apple had the trademark and the owner of the domain name is using the site for an online forum. Now, go to sleep. You're up way past bed time.
I could be dumb, but didn't Apple have the iPhone trademark before 2008? Like, you know, in 2007 after it was announced and the spat with Cisco was resolved?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottleworks
First come, first served. I don't understand why you all think Apple has a right to this domain name. If I buy nextcoolproduct.com. Apple then decides to make a product called "next cool product", it gives them no right to try to claim my web site. It makes no difference if it's some amazing web site or just a parked domain. I got there first. If Apple wants it, they have to buy it from the party who owns it. This is how the real world works. You can't cry to mom and dad.
Okay - but then - if Apple wants to buy that domain from you - the sale price should be based not on what the value is to Apple but the value to you. What would you lose in revenue, marketing, etc if you lost a domain that you parked. And if your answer is, oh no, if it is worth millions of dollars to Apple then they should pay - then you are right back to the only reason you claimed it is in order to gouge the company who has a stronger claim.
a case such as iphone5 - unless it was registered prior to the original release of the iPhone - then it is a pretty weak argument that anyone but Apple is entitled to use it. If you did iPhoneFive.com perhaps Apple might have a harder time claiming that rights to that.
a case where you actually have a product or a company etc - didn't Avaya have an iPhone prior to Apple using that name - where you have already invested time and money and have a product - then Apple (or whoever the company is) should have to pay more if they want to buy the rights from you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Er… yes?
I don't know anything about this, I don't like it at all, I want it changed. I don't understand who these companies are (GoDaddy, the one with a cow, etc.) that they can come in and somehow automatically own all URL names and you have to buy yours from them. I don't get it at all.
We should be buying static IP addresses from the international repository of them or whatever. Then we create the name by which that IP is known.
And when's the world going to shift to IPv6, anyway? Aren't we out of v4 addresses?
IPv6 World Day II is next month so update your routers now and play World of Warcraft over the new Internet! Be the first guy on your block with your very own /48!!!!
APNIC is completely out. ARIN thinks they have enough to get through 2013, RIPE is running short along with the other RIRs and have scaled way back in the number and size of allocations assigned. MS recently paid about millions ($11 per IP) in a bankruptcy auction from Nortel for their old blocks and still had to seek ARIN approval to keep them (justify need within current usage policy). IPv6 to the homes is a must but seems like more of a 2013 target. Apple's Airport base stations are pretty highly rated, btw. Fortunately most of the junk on The Net is hosted in the US with bigger content delivery more regionalized. I'll be quite happy when networks addresses are not a constrained resource for providers.
On the previous stuff, IPs and domains are independent of one another. But companies like GoDaddy are agents and service bundlers to make things easier for the smaller entities wanting to get in. Seems like a bit of a slimy racket with them registering any name they can think of and then selling it at a premium + maintenance... But good business is where you find it, right? It's their ads I really can't stand.
Holders of trademarks and copyrights will win out; they just have to prove it. The smart money is in guessing the name of a product not yet on the market where there's no priors like if I was smart enough to have owned "iBooks.com"
Quote:
Originally Posted by MGLeet
I could be dumb, but didn't Apple have the iPhone trademark before 2008? Like, you know, in 2007 after it was announced and the spat with Cisco was resolved?
I think that was with "IOS" and "iOS". Apple paid.
I didn't say that owning a trademark would automatically give you rights to the domain name.
However, for a strong trademark, it COULD prevent someone else from legally obtaining the rights (or, more accurately, they could obtain the rights, but when you filed with WIPO to have their rights removed, WIPO would do so).