4 ms·
I think owning the .com should be the new criteria for owning a trademark.
by knowzie 16y ago
I think owning the .com should be the new criteria for owning a trademark.
- davidu 16y agoThat's a terrible idea. Just think about it for more than one second.
- knowzie 16y agoI guess it would make trademarks pretty expensive.
- rosswarren 16y agoNo really, it's a terrible idea.
- mckoss 16y agoOne second is up. I stil don't understand your reasoning. Care to explain?
- techsupporter 16y agoWho owns whitehouse.com? Should that entity now have a right to "White House" as a trademark and, in the case of this discussion, @whitehouse on Twitter, on the basis of owning that domain?
- mckoss 16y agoYes, but the domain registration process is just another "registration process". The domain one is "modern" (inexpensive, online, self-service), the trademark one (USPTO) is "old" ("manual", "offline", "cumbersome", "expensive"). Why should the government get whitehouse.com - they are entitled to whitehouse.gov. Are you saying governments should have precedence over the priority of other entities? Since we are discussing here, an international trademark system, I think the properties of the domain registration system are much preferred to the properties of the fragmented and ill-defined international trademark process.
- adestefan 16y agoI believe what they're trying to say is that .com is a completely arbitrary demarcation. Are you saying that a .com should have precedence over the priority of a .org, .edu, or .co.uk? Should Harvard Book Store (harvard.com) be somehow entitled to @harvard over Harvard University (harvard.edu)?
- BrandonM 16y agoNot to mention that more than one business can have the same name (if they are registered in different categories), but only one person can own a .com. Examples: Live with Regis and Kelly Windows (or XBox) Live Live (the band) BBC Radio 5 Live
- davidu 16y agoGoogle for "Domain Squatting" or "Domain Parking"
- jgroome 16y ago...And that's when domain squatters take over the world.