Comments on: The Battle Over Chicago2016.com http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/18/the-battle-over-chicago2016com/ A blog about the domain name industry Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:02:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: andrew http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/18/the-battle-over-chicago2016com/comment-page-1/#comment-5222 andrew Fri, 19 Sep 2008 14:27:20 +0000 http://www.dnxpert.com/?p=804#comment-5222 They already filed a wipo claim. This lawsuit was filed after the wipo claim. They already filed a wipo claim. This lawsuit was filed after the wipo claim.

]]> By: Daniel Felice http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/18/the-battle-over-chicago2016com/comment-page-1/#comment-5221 Daniel Felice Fri, 19 Sep 2008 10:33:34 +0000 http://www.dnxpert.com/?p=804#comment-5221 Interesting! I have "perth2024.com" wonder if he wants to buy it.... Interesting! I have “perth2024.com” wonder if he wants to buy it….

]]> By: Ken http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/18/the-battle-over-chicago2016com/comment-page-1/#comment-5218 Ken Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:28:02 +0000 http://www.dnxpert.com/?p=804#comment-5218 ...ex post facto... …ex post facto…

]]> By: Andrew http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/18/the-battle-over-chicago2016com/comment-page-1/#comment-5217 Andrew Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:16:45 +0000 http://www.dnxpert.com/?p=804#comment-5217 Chicago2016.com was registered on August 8th, 2004. The USOC was granted a Trademark on various uses of this term between late 2007 and early 2008. This goes to show the bullishness of some people. They think they are allowed access to the domain because they got a trademark for it after this guy bought the domain and put a site up? Though, I will not dispute that the content on the domain makes it a very interesting case. Is this TM infringement, or a truly great fan site about the Olympic bid? Chicago2016.com was registered on August 8th, 2004. The USOC was granted a Trademark on various uses of this term between late 2007 and early 2008. This goes to show the bullishness of some people. They think they are allowed access to the domain because they got a trademark for it after this guy bought the domain and put a site up? Though, I will not dispute that the content on the domain makes it a very interesting case. Is this TM infringement, or a truly great fan site about the Olympic bid?

]]> By: David McAllister http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/18/the-battle-over-chicago2016com/comment-page-1/#comment-5216 David McAllister Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:04:09 +0000 http://www.dnxpert.com/?p=804#comment-5216 It is interesting that chicag2016.org was registered on 2004-08-12 and Chicago2016.com was registered 4 days earlier on August 08, 2004. The trademark (5 in total) were filed in November 2006 is interesting, over a year later. The Chicago2016.com domain was in use for a year before the ORG owners filed for the TM. Considering that the US Olympic Committee is a Congressionally chartered NPO makes either the GOV or ORG extension the best place for their site and not the commercial COM. I hope Stephen wins this one. It is interesting that chicag2016.org was registered on 2004-08-12 and Chicago2016.com was registered 4 days earlier on August 08, 2004. The trademark (5 in total) were filed in November 2006 is interesting, over a year later. The Chicago2016.com domain was in use for a year before the ORG owners filed for the TM. Considering that the US Olympic Committee is a Congressionally chartered NPO makes either the GOV or ORG extension the best place for their site and not the commercial COM. I hope Stephen wins this one.

]]> By: admin http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/18/the-battle-over-chicago2016com/comment-page-1/#comment-5215 admin Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:20:44 +0000 http://www.dnxpert.com/?p=804#comment-5215 You are actually wrong, it's "a moniker protected by trademark" not "a moniker protected buy trademark" You are actually wrong, it’s “a moniker protected by trademark” not “a moniker protected buy trademark”

]]> By: free wallpapers http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/18/the-battle-over-chicago2016com/comment-page-1/#comment-5213 free wallpapers Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:14:22 +0000 http://www.dnxpert.com/?p=804#comment-5213 buy and not by is the correct in the above post. buy and not by is the correct in the above post.

]]> By: free wallpapers http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/18/the-battle-over-chicago2016com/comment-page-1/#comment-5212 free wallpapers Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:13:07 +0000 http://www.dnxpert.com/?p=804#comment-5212 I hope he keeps his domain. If the city didn't want someone to have this domain, it should by all the domains from chicago2001.com to chicago2999.com I believe it's belong to Frayne the rule is first come first served... I hope he keeps his domain. If the city didn’t want someone to have this domain, it should by all the domains from chicago2001.com to chicago2999.com

I believe it’s belong to Frayne the rule is first come first served…

]]> By: Jason http://www.dnxpert.com/2008/09/18/the-battle-over-chicago2016com/comment-page-1/#comment-5210 Jason Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:13:07 +0000 http://www.dnxpert.com/?p=804#comment-5210 I just "picked" up Pick Chicago dot com from the daily drop not long ago. Looks like I just found my end user...! :) I just “picked” up Pick Chicago dot com from the daily drop not long ago. Looks like I just found my end user…! :)

]]>