2 ms·

It can be super costly to legally gain control of a domain that contains your mark (tens of thousands of dollars). And there is no guarantee you will win it bac

by Kavan 15y ago

It can be super costly to legally gain control of a domain that contains your mark (tens of thousands of dollars). And there is no guarantee you will win it back. Trademarks are registered by country/territory, so even though you may have the mark in the US, it doesn't mean that someone else can't use it in another country. My concern is that many people on HN are building brands, and the last thing you want is someone buying yourbrand.xxx and covering it with porn. If you have an established brand, you almost have to buy the .xxx.

SwellJoe 15y ago
"It can be super costly to legally gain control of a domain that contains your mark (tens of thousands of dollars). And there is no guarantee you will win it back." Why would you want to "win it back" in the case of yourbrand.xxx? It's worthless to a non-porn brand. "My concern is that many people on HN are building brands, and the last thing you want is someone buying yourbrand.xxx and covering it with porn." Why would this be a concern? It's not worth anything to a pornographer to, for example, register virtualmin.xxx and cover it with porn (except maybe for extortion value). I could see "google.xxx" or "twitter.xxx" being a problem, but in those cases, they'd want to sue for trademark infringement. The domain name is irrelevant. "If you have an established brand, you almost have to buy the .xxx." If so, it's a license to extort money. I'm just not going to participate in that sort of scam, and I don't think anyone else should, either. All the people that do are funding further efforts in the same direction.
- Kavan 15y ago
  Household brands like Twitter, Google, Nike, Zara, Walmart, Ford and KPMG will IMHO pay. This is not binary, it is a continuum. Will TechCrunch buy theirs? Will AirBnb, Path or Zaarly? It is a risk decision for these businesses. For a relatively small amount of money companies are removing the potential brand and legal cost risk of not owning their .xxx. The more important your brand the more likely you will be to pay. I totally agree with you that this is 'extortion', but just because it may not be right, doesn't mean we won't be affected by it.

by Kavan 15y ago

SwellJoe 15y ago

"It can be super costly to legally gain control of a domain that contains your mark (tens of thousands of dollars). And there is no guarantee you will win it back." Why would you want to "win it back" in the case of yourbrand.xxx? It's worthless to a non-porn brand. "My concern is that many people on HN are building brands, and the last thing you want is someone buying yourbrand.xxx and covering it with porn." Why would this be a concern? It's not worth anything to a pornographer to, for example, register virtualmin.xxx and cover it with porn (except maybe for extortion value). I could see "google.xxx" or "twitter.xxx" being a problem, but in those cases, they'd want to sue for trademark infringement. The domain name is irrelevant. "If you have an established brand, you almost have to buy the .xxx." If so, it's a license to extort money. I'm just not going to participate in that sort of scam, and I don't think anyone else should, either. All the people that do are funding further efforts in the same direction.

Kavan 15y ago
Household brands like Twitter, Google, Nike, Zara, Walmart, Ford and KPMG will IMHO pay. This is not binary, it is a continuum. Will TechCrunch buy theirs? Will AirBnb, Path or Zaarly? It is a risk decision for these businesses. For a relatively small amount of money companies are removing the potential brand and legal cost risk of not owning their .xxx. The more important your brand the more likely you will be to pay. I totally agree with you that this is 'extortion', but just because it may not be right, doesn't mean we won't be affected by it.