Pair files three trademark applications for .store.
More people are trying to trademark potential top level domain names now that ICANN has approved the program.
The latest attempt is by Eric Doerr of Delaware and Greg Disler of Pennsylvania. The pair filed applications for three marks; two for .store and one for dotStore.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark office won’t issue trademarks for top level domain names, but that hasn’t stopped people from trying to slide them by. It has created some contentious debate in the ICANN community.
In this case the three applications cite different fields of use, not just for a top level domain name.
While ICANN doesn’t plan to consider a trademark when selecting an applicant, that doesn’t mean someone won’t try to use a trademark to halt others’ new TLD plans.
.Store seems fairly similar to an initiative for .shop. Frankly, I like .store better.
Tag says
No ICANN will not consider trademarks when awarding registry contracts, but it would make it quite difficult for a registry to market a product that someone else owns the brand rights for.
Good bargaining position when involved in a competing applicant negotiation.
John Berryhill says
“it would make it quite difficult for a registry to market a product that someone else owns the brand rights for.”
And I’ll wait on the edge of my seat to figure out how someone can “own the brand rights” in a product which they themselves do not and cannot market.
TLD registry contracts are revocable and re-assignable by ICANN. The TLD is not “owned” by the registry.
If the suggestion here is that ICANN would be constrained from re-assigning a TLD to another entity, then the entire process of periodic evaluation for that purpose could be skipped.
A registry has similar “rights” in a TLD which a broadcaster has been granted in the use of spectrum by the FCC. It is a revocable license with a finite term.
RH says
John Berryhill always worth the read. Great comment John.
TAG says
Thanks for joining the discussion Mr Berryhill. I appreciate the expert input on the issue.
Are ‘DOTVEGAS’, ‘DOTFAMILY’ and their confusingly similar versions ‘.VEGAS’ and ‘.FAMILY’ NOT ‘owned brand rights’?
They currently hold registered U.S. patents for ‘domain name registration’
http://goo.gl/T1AiB
http://goo.gl/4XwcS
or am I missing something?
TAG says
sorry, not patent, trademarks
TAG says
I see your point, that registries themselves cannot market and sell domain names. Yes, strange stuff.
Alex Tajirian says
.Store and .Shop are terrible ideas (http://www.circleid.com/posts/focus_on_gtld_niches_not_on_the_number_of_registrations/) so why spend more $ on protection?