Slashdot Mirror
Graduate Student Defends Right To Own Chicago2016.com
An anonymous reader points to a story in the Chicago Tribune about another domain-name battle. Quoting the article: "As Chicago wages its battle to host the 2016 Olympics, it also finds itself scrapping over a valuable piece of cyberspace: the domain name of Chicago2016.com. The bid team along with the U.S. Olympic Committee are trying to wrest that online address from Stephen Frayne Jr., a 29-year-old MBA student. Frayne snagged it back in 2004, about two years before the bid was launched. ... 'We certainly see Chicago2016.com as the logical default domain for our site, and we believe having someone else control it is misleading for people seeking information about Chicago's bid,' said Patrick Sandusky, a spokesman for Chicago 2016, a moniker protected by trademark."
This does not a case of someone trying to make a buck on the name. It looks like someone smart who registered a domain name for the purpose of discussion. The domain is not parked, not defamitory and is in use. Case closed. If this he looses his domain name, then who is next?
I could get a great look an MBA by sticking my head up his ass, but I'd rather take Chicago2016.com word for it.
i forget
I can understand the notion that people who snipe domains associated with trademarks generally can't hold on to them. The idea that one can seize a domain that has been owned longer than a given trademark has existed seems downright dangerous, however.
The notion is awfully close to essentially saying that anybody who can't afford a stable of relevant lawyers can have domain names taken at the whim of those who can, which is rather an ugly idea.
a spokesman for Chicago 2016, a moniker protected by trademark.
Awww, isn't it too bad that trademarks don't give you retroactive ownership of whatever you like? Next time, check BEFORE you secure the trademark to see if it's already available. In fact, I bet they did- and just assumed they could take it over, just like how the IOC and USOC shut down everything named "olympic", even stuff that was named because said business was near a (different) Mount Olympus.
Raise your hand if you're completely fed up with the Olympics. Raise your hand if you think it's time that the IOC/USOC-bought legislation "protecting" the Olympic "trademark" was repealed.
Please help metamoderate.
It's an under-appreciated punctuation mark anyway.
Fixed. Sorry, I just couldn't resist. ;-)
What's next, grant the patent to the large organizations simply because they're large?
Watch yourself, son. You're dangerously close to infringing my patent on "a method for granting patents to entities using a relative comparison of the size of entities."
i forget
chicago2016.org already contains an official site, so I cannot understand why they have to have the .com site as well. I am not a fan of domain squatters, but I am only for kicking someone off of their domain when there is blatant demonstrated abuse of the system and when no other alternatives are available. This does not appear to be the case here.
*raises both hands*
...and the idea of mounting olympus is raising my wood.
-- Sex is the antonym of pringles. Once you pop it's time to stop.
Since when can someone snatch a trade name (which is basically what a domain name is), just because it "fits"??
The old rules basically were: if you registered a name first, it was yours, unless it could be construed as misleading or confusing to consumers (i.e., confusing one product for another), based on someone else's EXISTING name.
This might not be the best example, but a rocket and a tennis shoe could both be called "Nike", even though they were otherwise unrelated, because there was little possibility of confusion.
Chicago did not have the name first. If the goddamned business people would have some foresight, they would have grabbed such names when they started thinking about bidding for the Olympics... not years later after someone beat them to it. I do not see where there is any legal principle that says, "We didn't think of it then, but it obviously should be ours, so we want to take it now!"
I call "sour grapes". They fucked up, and now want to take advantage of someone who was smarter than they were. That does not a legal case make. If they want to make money on the name, then grab the name first! Why should they take precedence over someone with more business-savvy then they have?
a) We move the Olympics year!
b) Chicago gets a new name!
Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
Dear Marketing Wonks:
The next time you come up with some brilliant idea or name the FIRST thing you should do is perform a domain name lookup to see if your name is already taken. If it isn't then you should register it immediately! Do not wait until you make the presentation. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200. Trying to retroactively take a domain name from some guy who snatched it up because you were too lazy to register it makes no sense. If you have some brilliant idea then chance are there are about 2,000 people out there with the same idea. Cover your ass and do your homework. That is all.
Signed,
The Internet
Why shouldn't the olympics take the .org and leave him with the .com? Are the olympics listed officially as a for-profit business?
The IOC or Chicago 2016 should hire this kid. He's clearly quicker than their people, and if he's getting an MBA he's probably qualified to do _something_ in their organization (like "supervise" a project completely outside his realm of competence). Make one of the conditions of his ludicrously high contract payments that he surrenders the domain, everybody wins (except for people who want the Olympics to be about something other than corruption and greed, but that's already a lost cause).
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
Dear City of Chicago,
We regret to inform you that we have voted our 2016 Olympic Games be held at the fine city of Amsterdam, and not Chicago, IL.
Our decision was based on many factors, and your city scored quite well on all criteria of the selection process.
But when it came down to it, Amsterdam2016.com was actually registered to the right people.
Sincereley,
The Olympic Planning Task Force
-David
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Now if you created a parody site called "mcchocolatecake.com" and testified that you had used the term with the belief that it was so outlandish that McDonald's would never use it AND that any onlooker would see the name as a parody rather than a legitimate name, then you might have a case. But if McDonald's did come out with a McChocolateCake, you might be screwed anyway. It would be up to the ICANN panel to decide.
Not necessarily.
There was a very similar situation with Malcolm McBratney, who's nickname is McBrat. He sponsored a Rugby team an put his nickname on the shorts. McDonalds tried to sue him, partially based on their plans for a childrens clothing range. Although their planned name was McKids, NOT McBrats.
Anyway, they lost. It probably didn't help them that Malcom is an IP lawyer.
You can read more at: http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/articles/McBrats-wins-in-IP-lawyer-vs-Maccas-case_z68530.htm
Ever stop to think
Well that would be me. To avoid being slashdotted to hell I'm not posting the link to my blog but you can figure it out if you try hard enough.
In 2000 I purchased the .net domain of my site intentionally avoiding the .com since I'm not a commerce site. Fast forward to 2005 when some wrestler named Raige came into being. On top of that I was sent a notice to immediately surrender my domain to this douche bag.
I actually was lucky enough to have college legal resources available to me and brought the issue to them. Fact is, since he didn't exist when I purchased the domain he had no standing what so ever. I replied to the letter with some legal mumbo jumbo and they replied with a threat of a lawsuit. I told them to go ahead but that I was willing to fight all the way.
The issues that come with this guys site are the following .com site... that means it commerce... if it's not he might be in trouble. However all that he would have to do is sell a T-shirt through www.geekstuff.com or something.
1) Did he create the site knowingly of previous site names the olympics used?
Does NOT matter. You cannot trademark a naming scheme. You CAN trademark a name. So while a symbol, or McChicken can be trademarked... "Mc" cannot. It could be argued in court if someone made a McChickenWafer...
2) Is this guy a commercial entity? He has a
3) Does he actively use the site? If he didn't... he would be viewed as a squatter and smished. However, the site is actively in use... meaning that this isn't a problem.
In short, ICANN will not be able to take the name and the Olympics will have to create another site or purchase it from him.