Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ICANN's Trademark Clearinghouse Launching Today

Posted by Unknown on from the no-domain-for-you dept.

itwbennett writes "If you want to protect your brand before ICANN rolls out the new gTLDs (generic top-level domains), here's your chance. The clearinghouse will allow trademark owners to register their marks for an annual fee of between $95 and $150. The clearinghouse 'doesn't necessarily prevent trademark infringement or cybersquatting, but it does help trademark owners and brand owners somewhat in mitigating the damage that might occur,' said Keith Kupferschmid, general counsel and vice president of IP policy and enforcement for the Software and Information Industry Association (SIIA). 'We've been telling brand owners it's not that expensive to protect themselves and they ought to do it.'" All of the new TLD registrars will be required to check the trademark clearinghouse before issuing domains, preemptively squashing trademark disputes.

49 comments

  1. A not-so-subtle scam, you say? WHY!? I NEVER! by zedrdave · · Score: 4, Funny

    For an extra $100, ICANN will send you your TLD VIP package that includes instructions on how to get on the faster VIP internets and make your domain load up spontaneously on people's browser when they utter your brand's name.

    1. Re: A not-so-subtle scam, you say? WHY!? I NEVER! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they have to say it three times (just like Beetlejuice).

    2. Re:A not-so-subtle scam, you say? WHY!? I NEVER! by mwvdlee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To be fair, how could anything based on their own gTLD scam NOT be a scam?
      Seriously; who really needs the new gTLD's? Was it supposed to expand the number of available domain names? If so, why would this clearinghouse exist at all?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    3. Re: A not-so-subtle scam, you say? WHY!? I NEVER! by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually, they have to say it three times (just like Beetlejuice).

      I said "Microsoft" three times and was hit by a flying chair.

    4. Re: A not-so-subtle scam, you say? WHY!? I NEVER! by noh8rz10 · · Score: 2

      "nice brand you have here... it would be a shame if anything... happened to it."

    5. Re:A not-so-subtle scam, you say? WHY!? I NEVER! by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      ICANN originated in the U.S. so they're following the basics of Trademark Law that requires you to protect your trademark or loose it and it's the reason we see trademark lawsuits to begin with.

      You are correct that this is just another damn scam involving trademarks since to be protected by Trademark Law, they must be Registered and we already have a clearinghouse of those registered trademarks.

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
  2. Money by PGC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Give us your moneys to put your name on a list. Not that we will actually do something with it, but it will give you a nice and fuzzy feeling.

    --
    The Dutch will inherit the earth. If not, we'll settle for a bit of ocean. Beta delenda est!
    1. Re:Money by jittles · · Score: 1

      See I read the quote from the guy as "Giving Guido $100 might keep your business safe. Bad things can happen in this neighborhood. $100 isn't that much money."

  3. ICANN, really... by crutchy · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...nobody gives a fuck

    your little DNS oligarchy will be over when the US dollar collapses anyway

    1. Re:ICANN, really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lolwut

    2. Re:ICANN, really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That got out of hand quickly.

  4. "rolls out" or "doles out", but NOT "roles out" by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 4, Informative
    re : before ICANN roles out the new gTLDs (generic top-level domains), [emphasis mine]
    .
    You could say: before ICANN rolls out the new gTLDs

    or, you could say:

    before ICANN doles out the new gTLDs

    but srsly, you cannot say:

    before ICANN roles out the new gTLDs

    "Rolls out" and "doles out" have different implications, but they would at least make some sense. Hello, /., we need an editor on aisle 5, please send an editor to aisle 5 now, we've got a grammar spill. Bring the sawdust... ;>)

    1. Re:"rolls out" or "doles out", but NOT "roles out" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      re : before ICANN roles out the new gTLDs (generic top-level domains), [emphasis mine] . You could say:

      before ICANN rolls out the new gTLDs

      or, you could say:

      before ICANN doles out the new gTLDs

      but srsly, you cannot say:

      before ICANN roles out the new gTLDs

      "Rolls out" and "doles out" have different implications, but they would at least make some sense. Hello, /., we need an editor on aisle 5, please send an editor to aisle 5 now, we've got a grammar spill. Bring the sawdust... ;>)

      Maybe they're roleplaying at rolling out the new domains.

  5. That's a nice looking trademark you have there... by kinarduk · · Score: 2

    You wouldn't want it to be infringed upon would you?

  6. Who gets .apple? by magic+maverick+ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Who gets .mcdonalds? Who gets .burgerking ("The burgers are better at Hungry Jack's")

    And I could repeat trademarks that apply in different geographical areas, and in different business areas. I sell computer services under the name Coca Cola, does that mean I can prevent a global beverage company from squatting on .cocacola?

    In other words, as previously mentioned, this whole this is a scam.

    --
    HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!
    1. Re: Who gets .apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This scam is a little different than that. With this $95 - $150 fee per trademark, per year they'll notify you when someone is going to buy a domain that uses your trademark on one of these new vanity gTLDs and you'll have the chance to contest the purchase (ie, buy it yourself) or give up all future claims.

    2. Re:Who gets .apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I sell computer services under the name Coca Cola

      I strongly suspect that you don't.

    3. Re:Who gets .apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to take a look at this: www.nissan.com

    4. Re: Who gets .apple? by parkinglot777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      they'll notify you when someone is going to buy a domain that uses your trademark on one of these new vanity gTLDs and you'll have the chance to contest the purchase (ie, buy it yourself) or give up all future claims.

      Yes, but you (owner of the trademark) still have to do the work. What they (ICANN) do is to watch if anyone else is going to buy similar domain to your trademark which is somewhat an extension to what they are doing. The trademark owner really has to do the work to stop/deter the purchase (owner of the intellectual property must enforce his/her own IP).

      Also even though someone else has bought a domain name with your trademark and used it to make money, you could still sue for damages (if there is any) without needing to know it in advance. One problem I am seeing is that how would one determine whether the domain name bought by someone else is violating your trademark. From the USPTO ( http://www.uspto.gov/faq/trademarks.jsp ), you may challenge those who use your trademark in the country where your trademark has been registered. If someone registered the domain name in a country where your trademark has not been registered but sells products (online) in the country your trade mark is registered, what can you do? I am not so sure you can really stop the domain name purchase this way...

      In other words, they just want free money every year with their little afford to do the work for you. Is it really worth it?

    5. Re: Who gets .apple? by martin-boundary · · Score: 2
      Sounds like a scam to me. The whole point of trademarks is to prevent others from using the mark in the course of their normal business activities without explicit authorization from the owner. By making trademarks available as gTLDs, ICANN is directly infringing on the trademark owner's rights, doubly so if they are doing so knowing that the word happens to be a trademark. So any trademark owner could sue ICANN for using their trademarks without permission.

      IANAL and all that, but I don't see how ICANN can even legally offer gTLDs that happen to be trademarks. (*)(**)

      (*) I would actually expect ICANN to pay someone to filter out all words that *are* trademarks, just to make sure that none of them could possibly be sold as gTLDs. I guess I'm not a CEO.

      (**) Perhaps the insurance scam is designed to contractually establish ICANN's right to use the trademark for their own business purposes, selling it back to the legitimate owner? Sneaky!

    6. Re: Who gets .apple? by 1u3hr · · Score: 2

      By making trademarks available as gTLDs, ICANN is directly infringing on the trademark owner's rights

      No. That logic would mean that a signwriter, say, who was asked to make a sign that infringed a trademark would be liable. ICANN can't be responsible for checking that every domain that someone orders is under some trademark or another.

      But ICANN are bloodsucking jerks who are fucking up the whole domain name system by thinking of more and more ways to make people think they need more and more domains, when any .com would do and free subdomains if you needed them. With random TLDs they're creating a system that makes it easier for scammers to create deceptive and infringing names. But that's capitalism.

    7. Re:Who gets .apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ain't gonna open that link, but... So, you're selling computer services under the name "Coca Cola" with website on nissan.com?..

      Makes perfect sense! Hope your grocery chain, TransAero, does fine too.

    8. Re:Who gets .apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm the only person with the name Suzuki!

      No, I am!

      I sell computers, and therefore have the rights to sell computers under my name, Suzuki!

      No you don't, because I sell scooters under my name, Suzuki.

      Fuck you both, I'm a Canadian and I sell environmental services and shit. And my name is Suzuki.

    9. Re:Who gets .apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suppose .mcdonalds has been claimed by the Clan McDonald of Scotland, United Kingdom (locally known as "The McDonald's") as their Clan website. They have legitimate interest in the name and did not register the TLD in bad faith. No "TradeMark register" is going to take that top level domain away from them.

    10. Re: Who gets .apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I already get notified by some nice service in China, they are always sending me email saying someone is trying to register a name with my trademark in the.cn domain. All I have do do is send a few hundred dollars to them each time and they will register the name for me.

    11. Re: Who gets .apple? by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      Trademarks have to be Registered to be a trademark, thus they're on a database that is searchable before you even apply for a trademark. Thus ICANN could be in a very shaky legal position in the United States for even offering this - Keep in mind that ICANN is based in the United States even though they're supposedly no longer under the control of the U.S. Government.

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    12. Re: Who gets .apple? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      Trademarks have to be Registered to be a trademark, thus they're on a database that is searchable before you even apply for a trademark. Thus ICANN could be in a very shaky legal position in the United States for even offering this

      Are they supposed to investigate every entity that wants to create a domain name and see if there is an infringement? That could not be automated. If you make the registrar responsible for any infringements then they will have to charge thousands of dollars for each domain to pay for the due diligence, or get sued bankrupt.

      Its the entity that orders and uses the domain that is responsible. Anyway, trademarks are not locks on words under all circumstances. Google any fairly common surname, You'll find dozens of trademarks using it, in different locations and trades. All can be quite valid.

      People are thinking about the big names, it's the millions of small companies with trademarks that make this absurd.

  7. Non-commercial Internet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to see a non-commercial internet on which any commercial activity is strictly prohibited. Wouldn't it be possible to build this on top of TCP/IP on the basis of some very strict EULA and other legal provisions?

    1. Re:Non-commercial Internet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. At least, not the way you want to do it. The way to get a non-commercial Internet is to abolish commerce.
      Communism (of the real variety, no states, countries etc., independent, decentralized, confederated communes and neighborhoods) is probably the most sure method. (Note: Anarcho-communism.)

      But messing around with EULAs or whatever? That's just crazy.

      Moreover, I'm not sure that commerce and commercial activity per se is the problem. The problem is far reaching corporations, too powerful governments and similar. The solution is anarchy. Within a true anarchy you'll have communism, mutualism, and various experiments going on. Sure, eventually, they'll converge on true communism (because in a post-scarcity world it's be the best method of resource distribution), but in the mean time, what's wrong with a little barter?

    2. Re:Non-commercial Internet? by muon-catalyzed · · Score: 1

      You can register a name such as "free" as your top level gTLD and start doing just that, offering *yourservice*.free domains, you can act as the registrar and the policy maker overseeing your brand new domain pool. However the establishment of such a new top level gTLD requires the operation of a domain registry and demonstration of technical and financial capacity, it will be difficult for small players to easily register and manage gTLDs, but VCs alike can still create a useful utility in the domain system.

  8. scam by Tom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously? This is so close to various scams that you need a microscope to spot the difference.

    Not to mention that it borders on a protection racket. "Nice trademark you have there. Would be a shame if anything happened to it..."

    ICANN needs to be replaced.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only replaced. The people in charge need to go to jail.

    2. Re:scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Completely true. But for anyone who actually cares about this 'service' the fee is a rounding error. I'm even surprised they don't charge more protection money.

  9. can we get a... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .fukiccan

  10. AS RICO SAYS: WHAT A RACKET !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sit back and let them pay you for being a little less afraid !! Uhahahahahah !!

  11. Nice work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $185k per gTLD simply for "evaluation" and $150pa per trademark simply for "protection".

    • 1. Create scarcity
    • 2. Create fear
    • 3. Abolish scarcity for the very rich
    • 4. Create more fear
    • 5. Non-profit!!!
  12. Send your money to ICANN, get nothing in return by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    In other words, ICANN is still just looking for more of your money. That is all they have cared about for many years now. They haven't cared for some time what impact their decisions have on people who use the internet, provided it brings more money to them.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  13. Extortion by paiute · · Score: 1

    I pay the USPTO for trademark registration, and that covers everything.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:Extortion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are not paying ICANN to protect your Domain. You are paying, $95 - $150, for them to tell you if someone is going to buy a gTLD with your Trademark in it. They will still let someone buy a gTLD with your trademark in it, they just tell you about it.
      You still need to enforce your trademark your self.

    2. Re:Extortion by paiute · · Score: 2

      I think I would rather my lawyers tell ICANN to not let someone buy a gTLD with my trademark in it.

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    3. Re:Extortion by Theaetetus · · Score: 2

      I think I would rather my lawyers tell ICANN to not let someone buy a gTLD with my trademark in it.

      Particularly because this system seems to be that you have a right of first refusal to buy a gTLD with your mark when someone else tries to buy one... and if you refuse to pay whatever ICANN asks, not only does the other guy get the gTLD, you waive all rights against them. In other words, this seems to waive your rights to a UDRP dispute and seizure of the domain.

  14. What's it for? by carou · · Score: 2

    The only use I can see for new TLD is to distinguish between different possible uses of the same name. e.g. consider how many web sites now have $(thing)-movie.com or $(thing)-band.com : if .movie and .band were TLDs, that's actually providing some benefit. But these are generic words, not trademarks. They're only useful if a registrar sells subdomains at a reasonable price, and the TLD will live or die depending on whether it can get a foothold in the market. This is a good thing.

    I just don't see a case for corporations buying their own TLD. Is there a substantial usability or branding difference between www.disney and disney.com? Everybody will just type "disney" into the address bar anyway, it will find the right site even if it has to go via google...

    1. Re:What's it for? by swillden · · Score: 1

      I just don't see a case for corporations buying their own TLD. Is there a substantial usability or branding difference between www.disney and disney.com? Everybody will just type "disney" into the address bar anyway, it will find the right site even if it has to go via google...

      Sure it will, after multiple DNS queries, then a query to Google, then a user click. If the TLD resolves directly to the company's web site, users will get there faster. Sites that load pretty slowly anyway won't benefit much, but those that care about page load times can see significant benefits.

      There are other reasons, I'm sure, but there's one, anyway. I'm guessing Google's registration of the "google" TLD is to accomplish exactly that (note: I work for Google but don't know anything about why Google has asked for the TLDs it has, or what it plans to do with them).

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  15. Double the registry, double the fun by the_arrow · · Score: 1

    So owners or registered trademarks have to register them again? To a company that says "It won't protect the marks from being used, just help when you sue". Isn't that why you registered the trademark with the government to begin with?

    --
    / The Arrow
    "How lovely you are. So lovely in my straightjacket..." - Nny
    1. Re:Double the registry, double the fun by the_arrow · · Score: 1

      owners or registered

      "Owners of registered" I mean.

      --
      / The Arrow
      "How lovely you are. So lovely in my straightjacket..." - Nny
  16. Cheap by Turminder+Xuss · · Score: 2

    All those complaining about the cost of pre-emptive action that could prevent an infringement suit are welcome to compare it to the first billable hour of lawyers engaged in emptive action.

    --
    You seem to regard science as some kind of dodge... or hustle.
  17. Great, someone will lay out a few G's for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sex
    phones
    apps
    cars
    shop
    sports
    computers
    mobile
    network
    talk
    voice
    america

  18. ICANN needs to die. by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    In other words ICANN is creating a whole host of phishing/identity problems with a money making TLD scheme which help nobody except phishers and their bottom line...

    (...drumroll...)

    Now they seriously have the nerve to seek mitigation against blatently predictable abuse of TLD insanity of their own making by soliciting even more money in extortion payments to safeguard their trademarks. WTF

    I wish operators in the root zone list would grow a fucking spine and revolt against these loosers. ICANN needs to be gutted/shut down and replaced with a governance structure not prone to corruption and endless seas of conflicts of interest.

  19. fucking horseshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is no free and open internet - this is a bunch of money grubbing fagots.

    I'll happily use my existing trademark to protect any name that is mine - and NOT pay ICANN and STILL have them enforce my USPTO trademark.

    fuck ICANN and their greedy jew ways.