Frank Schilling’s North Sound Names is the subject of a second URS filing over two domain names it registered of Uniregistry strings, aix.link and db2.link.
North Sound Names already successfully defended its first URS case filed against it, on Finn.Link
North Sound reportedly registered some 43,000 domain names in extensions owned by Uniregistry with .Link domains being heavily represented.
Although the Complainant on the URS filed today is not listed I would not be surprised to see it being IBM.
According to Wikipedia, “AIX, (Advanced Interactive eXecutive), is a series of proprietary Unix operating systems developed and sold by IBM for several of its computer platforms”, while DB2 is according to Wikipedia.org, a “family of database server products developed by IBM”.
On the other hand both domain names are parked and neither sites refer to any computer software or other similar products and have no links related to IBM or a competitor.
AIX is also a known in reference to many other things including the Armani Exchange and Db2 stands for many other things including a model of a rather expensive and fast Aston Martin car, which means this URS it will probably end with another win for Mr. Berryhill and Mr. Schilling.
Mike,
In the Armani Exchange figurative trademark what you see between the “A” and the “X” is not the letter “i”, but a vertical bar.
“A” stands for Armani and “X” for Exchange.
So it has nothing to do with the term “aix”. 🙂
Well someone should tell Google because its the first suggested search under aix on Google
Searches related to aix
armani exchange
Also Google makes mistakes 😉
They do???
Feel free to check with the USPTO and TMview if you don’t believe me.
So you will see it’s a vertical bar and not the letter “i”, I know the Armani Group pretty well.
And you can always tell Google if you want 😉
Exactly I am looking at a shirt right now that is not an i, it is a vertical bar like Andrea said.
Of course AIX is also a city in France and anyone is free to use a generic word within the scope of its ordinary meaning, so North Sound Names ultimately won these disputes. The Sunrise window was designed to offer brand-holders a low cost method for obtaining brand-centric domain names in advance of everyone else. As a registry operator it’s astonishing to see tens of thousands of generic names entered in the TM clearinghouse (with dual TM/Generic meaning such as aix.link) and to then see just a smattering of hundreds claimed by brands during Sunrise. These wins for North Sound Names and the wins that follow, show that the URS is not going to help you rewrite history where generic names are concerned. The cheapest most certain method of getting the new GTLD name you want is by pulling the trigger during Sunrise. GTLD registries ultimately want people using their names so brands wishing to acquire a valuable generic and intending to use (rather than warehouse) it might simply try asking the registry if they can have it. An ounce of sugar far better than a pound of salt where domain disputes are concerned.
“anyone is free to use a generic word within the scope of its ordinary meaning”
Totally agree with that.
Unfortunately sometimes I see parking pages for a generic keyword/term which show ad links which are not related to its generic meaning.
Just to mention again an example of domain you know (and own): JusDorange.com (jus d’orange), which in French means “Orange Juice”, where the landing page shows ads mainly related to clothing.
The French company Jus d’Orange has a registered TM on a few products classes, including clothing, since 1992. The domain jusdorange.com was registered in 1997.
Hope you have noticed that … 🙂
Yes, absolutely Andrea .. You are totally correct pointing that out.. We have an automated system that our upstream ad provider sometimes causes to over-ride but by and large intent shows itself over many names over many years. We have tried very hard to make sure names are targeted to their generic keyword and our intent is to run a clean operation. That does not mean the system will not fail and disapoint you/us from time to time – as it has in the case above. 🙂
Frank,
Thanks for your kind reply 🙂
More than “disappointing you/us” the question here is that in those cases you risk to lose a domain in a UDRP, so IMHO is definitely better to avoid parking domains which can have TM issues, even if they are “generics”.
It’s not necessarily that simple. In another business life I have won 35 UDRP’s. All 35 names were parked. Parking or the sale of advertising on your website is a legitimate use of the name. The challenge is not to encroach on the subject matter of a trademark but rather to target the generic intent or subject matter of the name. Even if one loses a UDRP because of incorrect targeting, losing the name is not always an equitable outcome. If I point apple.net to my apple farm for 10 years and one day my ad partner momentarily targets the name (incorrectly) to apple computers and Apple Computer takes a screenshot and udrp’s for the name, and the panelist decides to turn over the name to apple, that is not necessarily the end. It’s not equitable that I should loose my valuable intellectual property because of a momentary lapse of targeting. I could litigate to put the UPRP aside and quantify the actual damage caused by this momentary erroneous targeting and find a jury/judge who may agree that losing the name is not an equitable outcome. Damages could be quantified and then restitution made, short of losing the name. It all depends on the name and how valuable it is the degree to which the other party was harmed and your appetite to rack up legal bills to set precedent and make your point. You shouldn’t run and hide from Parking as some kind of evil because there is nothing wrong with parking per se.. It’s when you willfully infringe on the intellectual property rights of others for profit that most brand-holders get angry .. and I’m certainly not advocating that
“It’s not necessarily that simple.”
I’ve never said it’s that simple, I was just keeping it short 🙂
“Parking or the sale of advertising on your website is a legitimate use of the name.”
Totally agree with you, I’m used to park my names.
“If I point apple.net to my apple farm for 10 years and one day my ad partner momentarily targets the name (incorrectly) to apple computers and Apple Computer takes a screenshot and udrp’s for the name, and the panelist decides to turn over the name to apple”
The fact is that people know how ads provider algorithms work, and you can’t adjust them in a way to avoid that risk.
Furthermore often the ad partners don’t change it “momentarily”, but constantly target the name to some TM holders for similar terms/keywords, since their algorithms work that way. It’s not a momentarily mistake, it’s how their algos work. That’s why some people, since they don’t trust ads provider, park these kind of names with no ads or with a generic lander.
“I could litigate to put the UPRP aside and quantify the actual damage caused by this momentary erroneous targeting and find a jury/judge who may agree that losing the name is not an equitable outcome. Damages could be quantified and then restitution made, short of losing the name. It all depends on the name and how valuable it is the degree to which the other party was harmed and your appetite to rack up legal bills to set precedent and make your point.”
Sure I know we can, it depends if it’s worth your time and money, because ordinary lawsuits are way more expensive than UDRPs, as you correctly remind. Furthermore, as I said before, you have to demonstrate that erroneous targeting is a “temporary mistake ” of the ads provider, and not a constant, which you were aware of but you didn’t complain about until you get a UDRP.
“You shouldn’t run and hide from Parking as some kind of evil because there is nothing wrong with parking per se.. ”
I’m not running away from parking at all.
I’m used to park with ads my names, but I think we have to use some “precautions” with some types of domains.
Thanks for the nice chat 🙂
I would agree Andrea some names are just not worth parking, because the average domainer has no time and in most cases budget to set precedents and tie things up, some names are just best left unparked with a a welcome page or generic form.