Speaking solely for myself... If I was going to set up a business today, I might call it Microsoft. Or Ross' New Company - can't be sure which, anyways, the business license office won't tell me which is better from a legal or marketing standpoint, so it's very much up to me which one I go with. So I might call my trusty marketing consultant who will tell me that Microsoft is definitely the way to go (because it is such a well known name) and my legal consultant who will tell me that Ross' New Company is a crappy name, but it's way better than Microsoft because it won't get me sued.
Trademark holders very definitely have to enforce their rights because no one is is compelled to do so. As far as the specific claim goes, no names are "unavailable because of long-standing trademarking". Domains may have been assigned during sunrise and otherwise still available names might be trademarks. -rwr ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tech" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 3:35 PM Subject: Another .biz scam??? > Interesting question from a customer of mine, and I would hope SRS has a > good nuff answer for it: > > ------- > There still is one issue you haven't touched on. It's the pre-registration > of "show.biz," which I have recently been informed was not available because > of long-standing trademarking. Since I pre-registered in good faith that it > was potentially available, I am seeking the preregistration fees totalling > $88 for that one item. > --------- > > He makes a good point..if it was trademarked, why was he even able to > pre-register it (and pay the tickets, etc.) in the first place?? anyone > want to take a stab at explaining this mosh-pit? > > Jason >
