GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   .xxx Trademark Protection, Per a Domaining Article (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1022758)

davecummings 05-16-2011 09:08 AM

.xxx Trademark Protection, Per a Domaining Article
 
Per a posting today at Domaining.com:

http://domainincite.com/how-to-prote...nIncite.com%29

Robbie 05-16-2011 09:15 AM

That's just them trying to shake down mainstream companies too.

A trademark protects you against WHAT you trademark it for. So the .xxx guys are thinking that they can "protect" mainstream companies that have no affiliation to porn from having porn guys take their domain and start porn sites with a .xxx extension.

Now why in the hell anybody would seriously want to waste time and money opening up something like "homedepot.xxx" or "sony.xxx" is beyond me. lol

Of course all of us in porn who already have our trademarks for our sites and have them trademarked to pertain to porn...don't have to worry at all. You are already protected from some squatter buying your .xxx name and trying to start a porn site on it.

Couple of emails will take care of that. Just like any other extension.

Nikki_Licks 05-16-2011 09:21 AM

What a crock of crap....

I am sure this was all pre planned in the beginning of the scheme regarding .XXX.

And I am sure this won't be the last of the monetary rape that .XXX is going to cause.

Barry-xlovecam 05-16-2011 09:24 AM

Mainstream companies do not want their names being associated with porn — trademarking the name just assures success if a WIPO arbitration is actually necessary.

Successful businesses can easily afford the costs of obtaining a trademark — that is if you don't operate 500 domains ..

2intense 05-16-2011 09:28 AM

FUCK .xxx

baddog 05-16-2011 09:35 AM

I could have sworn they said. Xxx was only available to porn sites, meaning Sony.xxx is not available.

Rochard 05-16-2011 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 18142447)
I could have sworn they said. Xxx was only available to porn sites, meaning Sony.xxx is not available.

What gives them the right to decide that? No one decides what a .com or .xxx is for or how it's to be used.

pornguy 05-16-2011 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 18142412)
That's just them trying to shake down mainstream companies too.

A trademark protects you against WHAT you trademark it for. So the .xxx guys are thinking that they can "protect" mainstream companies that have no affiliation to porn from having porn guys take their domain and start porn sites with a .xxx extension.

Now why in the hell anybody would seriously want to waste time and money opening up something like "homedepot.xxx" or "sony.xxx" is beyond me. lol

Of course all of us in porn who already have our trademarks for our sites and have them trademarked to pertain to porn...don't have to worry at all. You are already protected from some squatter buying your .xxx name and trying to start a porn site on it.

Couple of emails will take care of that. Just like any other extension.



Honestly you answered your own question.

This is a scare tactic kind of like acacia suing everyone.

Redrob 05-16-2011 09:54 AM

A sign of quiet desperation, maybe?

vsex 05-16-2011 10:04 AM

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh what a crock of shit!

merina0803 05-16-2011 10:12 AM

UK based IPRota Ltd why these always in UK :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

woj 05-16-2011 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 18142412)
Now why in the hell anybody would seriously want to waste time and money opening up something like "homedepot.xxx" or "sony.xxx" is beyond me. lol

I can actually see some wise guys registering domains like facebook.xxx :2 cents:

Robbie 05-16-2011 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woj (Post 18142603)
I can actually see some wise guys registering domains like facebook.xxx :2 cents:

Yeah, that would be a "good" one I suppose...though how many people would ever type in that url is debatable.
Of course facebook doesn't need to buy that .xxx domain...they would definitely have grounds to stop that from happening because the .xxx extension would damage their trademarked brand.

Nobody needs to buy a .xxx domain. That's why that Joan Irvine woman is in Washington D.C. working as hard as she can to get some kind of legislation passed to FORCE all of us to do so. :(

GetSCORECash 05-16-2011 11:50 AM

Quote:

the fees we?ve seen so far from registrars for this service range from $299 to $648, but icm seems to think $200 to $300 is more realistic.

The blocks are expected to last forever, but because icm?s registry agreement with icann only lasts for 10 years, it can only guarantee the blocks for that amount of time.

So while it looks like a $30 to $65 annual fee, over the lifetime of the tld it may well steadily approach a negligible sum, if you?re thinking super-long-term.
To quote Robbie! "That's just them trying to shake down mainstream companies too."

TheDA 05-16-2011 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by merina0803 (Post 18142527)
UK based IPRota Ltd why these always in UK :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Stuart Lawley is a Brit with lots of UK friends he wants to keep sweet? :)

V_RocKs 05-16-2011 01:45 PM

FacebookOf.xxx here we come

u-Bob 05-16-2011 02:42 PM

The ICM registry is selling snake oil, plain and simple.

wasteland 05-16-2011 02:52 PM

If concerned and want to shake things up, go to as many fortune 500 companies as you have time for and alert them to this as an "anonymous stockholder concerned about any revenue being paid to dot-xxx that might be viewed as extortion by the SEC". Send links to the Xbiz article. That will make the ground rumble in a hurry, as most mainstream corps have no idea this is about to come up and bite them.

Cheers

davecummings 05-16-2011 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wasteland (Post 18143492)
If concerned and want to shake things up, go to as many fortune 500 companies as you have time for and alert them to this as an "anonymous stockholder concerned about any revenue being paid to dot-xxx that might be viewed as extortion by the SEC". Send links to the Xbiz article. That will make the ground rumble in a hurry, as most mainstream corps have no idea this is about to come up and bite them.

Cheers

The above is coming from and experienced legend, so let's do it.

Thanks!

Redrob 05-16-2011 08:53 PM

Bump for Colin's idea.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123