> most domains taken by UDRP and bullied from owners are not 'world famous' trademarks
like Coca-Cola.Indeed, 'world-famous' is not necessary to successfully challenge
a domain name - there are other criteria in the UDRP that mitigate the celebrity
of the mark: including prior usage, the location(s) of trademarks and the location
of the respondent (e.g. if they are in another country where the mark is not so well
known).
> WIPO grabbed JT.com from Israel citizen for Japan Tobacco Inc. Why
> should Japan Tobacco be allowed to have World Rights to the
> initials
'JT'?
From case no. D2000-0492:
The respondent was another Japanese company
(Yoshiki Okada), the complainant owns over 100 trademark registrations of JT throughout
the world and sells annually billions of dollars of cigarettes bearing the "JT" trademark
throughout the world. Thus, the Complainant's trademark "JT" has become well-known
throughout the world and especially in Japan. Bad faith was shown by the company
demanding no less than a million dollars for the name. The respondent never contested
these facts through no response. WIPO found that the respondent had no legitimate
reason for holding the name but for the purpose of "selling it to another person
for unjustifiable profit".
http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/word/2000/d2000-0492.doc
>
They could still use coke.com for marketing - just redirected to
> coke.drink.us.reg
as certificate of authentication.
That's fine, but it doesn't solve the 'problem'
of Coca-Cola preventing others of using the domain name coke.com.
> As to not
naming book 'Coca-Cola': In the first 2 minutes I found
> these - so likely
several more.
For all of your examples, use of the trademarks would have undoubtedly
been expressly licensed by The Coca-Cola Company. TMs can be licensed to anyone by
their owner. In fact, I know of one Sunrise registrant who licensed - for a considerable
amount - a trademark from a company that owned a generic trademark, in order to register
it during Sunrise.
I also know from experience that The Coca Cola Company has very
stringent and exacting licensing policies for the use of its famous mark. Unauthorized
usage of its mark will be met with very aggressive litigation; the company is extremely
protective of its mark.
I won't go through each of your examples of so-called
common words, but ...
rollerblade is in fact a trademarked name for in-line skates,
as band-aid is a brand for adhesive strips. These are specific branches of trademark
law where the brand has in fact become the class - however domain caselaw has traditionally
favored the original company that made that name famous to begin with.
Most of
the other examples you chose are not single common words but combinations of single
common words that were probably registered trademarks; the few that are single words
may have been famous enough to warrant greater claim to a name, or there may have
been other specific circumstances for the respondent to lose the name; one would
have to research each case to find out.
There have been undoubtedly very controversial
cases in the courts through the years and a judgement can usually be appealed, but
the Rule of Law is usually upheld in most cases: i.e. the courts do endeavor to maintain
consistency across courts and cases, regardless of who brings the action and who
it is against.