4 ms·
More or less the opinion I got from it, although the third party seems more like a service the guy used. The guy was clearly using Dropbox and its brand name fo
by greendestiny 17y ago
More or less the opinion I got from it, although the third party seems more like a service the guy used. The guy was clearly using Dropbox and its brand name for his gain, but I can't easily get behind this as good thing when he had domain name first and legitimately. If he went ahead and made a company of his own called dropbox he might well have been fine, who knows. Just felt compelled to comment because the anger directed at the guy seems a bit unfair - it was Dropboxes choice to start a company up called that when they knew they someone else owned the domain.
- pingswept 17y agoYeah, that seems about right to me. Still, I wish the guy would have just sold the domain if he wasn't going to do anything useful with it.
- lutorm 17y agoHe probably would have been fine if his business was airdropping goods or something else that can be construed as "dropbox" but in a realm sufficiently different from file syncing. He certainly couldn't have started a file syncing company called dropbox, that seems like obvious trademark infringement. Mere registration of a domain doesn't create a trademark.