Name Domain Names Violation

[Nick11380]

Hi all,

Simple question really. Would a site like davidguetta.co.uk or cherylcole.co.uk etc be violating some kind of copyright if the content on that site was relevant to the celebrity?

Thanks,
Nick

 

[GreyWing]

In most cases yep, you would have to have a very good argument to keep it. You would probably receive a DRS at best and a legal letter at worst requesting costs.

 

[Admin]

I've seen people put disclaimers saying it's a fan site etc. but not sure this will help you on legal grounds.

Admin

 

[Nick11380]

Thanks for the quick replies. Bit of a shame really! I have seen fansites as well, but I would imagine if you're ranking top for said celebrities then their management won't take too kindly to it.

So no loop holes here then?

 

[Edwin]

So no loop holes here then?

No, there really isn't ANY way to "get rich quick" through domains without working at it

 

[Nick11380]

No, there really isn't ANY way to "get rich quick" through domains without working at it

Huh? I really wasn't asking about getting rich quick. I was asking if anyone knew any legal loopholes that would allow someone to develop domains like the ones I mentioned in my op.

I'm well aware of the time it takes to generate cash through domains. But thanks for your concern.

 

[Edwin]

I said "get rich quick" because these sorts of name would be seeking to trade off the fame of the person they relate to.

In other words, if the person in question was a total unknown, they would have no value.

 

[mariogotze]

Nice answer Edwin

 

[accelerator]

Hi all,

Simple question really. Would a site like davidguetta.co.uk or cherylcole.co.uk etc be violating some kind of copyright if the content on that site was relevant to the celebrity?

Thanks,
Nick

Hi

You would be profiting off their "intellectual property", i.e. their fame, and this would mean you would be extremely likely to lose the case if they took you to a Nominet DRS. If you want to build a fan site, then I would choose a different name so you don't have the inconvenience of being DRS'd.

Regging the domain purely to sell it to the celebrity would be a case of squatting, i.e. attempting to profit from someone else's intellectual property which you are not entitled to, and if they know what they're doing they would just take you to Nominet DRS, as you would be extremely likely to lose the case.

I hope this helps.

Rgds

 

[Nick11380]

Hi

You would be profiting off their "intellectual property", i.e. their fame, and this would mean you would be extremely likely to lose the case if they took you to a Nominet DRS. If you want to build a fan site, then I would choose a different name so you don't have the inconvenience of being DRS'd.

Regging the domain purely to sell it to the celebrity would be a case of squatting, i.e. attempting to profit from someone else's intellectual property which you are not entitled to, and if they know what they're doing they would just take you to Nominet DRS, as you would be extremely likely to lose the case.

I hope this helps.

Rgds

That helps a lot - Luckily I didn't get too carried away with X Factor hopefuls and just wasted a couple of bob

 

[accelerator]

That helps a lot - Luckily I didn't get too carried away with X Factor hopefuls and just wasted a couple of bob

There are much better opportunities for making online revenue than running celebrity fan sites, so just do a bit of research and I expect you'll find something more exciting.

Rgds

 

[Nick11380]

There are much better opportunities for making online revenue than running celebrity fan sites, so just do a bit of research and I expect you'll find something more exciting.

Rgds

I am almost entirely involved in finance/spread betting domains & development as well as having developed affiliate sites for consumer electronics. FTR, this was not a 'big money making scheme' of mine and I'm not quite sure how I've given that impression ITT. I figured why not have a punt on a couple of X factor contestants and see what I can shift them for next year.

And the answer to the 'why not' (as you rightly said) is that I'd get my ass kicked by a team of lawyers.

 

[Ashton]

Nick, its not a personal go at you - a lot of people do things like this and make a bad name for domainers in general. People get a little bit defensive.

Although I think 'loop holes' is a bit of a bad phrase to use - it makes you look like you're trying to get away with doing something you know is wrong.

The best policy is to not reg/develop something that could be considered wrong or should belong to someone else.

 

[Nick11380]

Nick, its not a personal go at you - a lot of people do things like this and make a bad name for domainers in general. People get a little bit defensive.

Although I think 'loop holes' is a bit of a bad phrase to use - it makes you look like you're trying to get away with doing something you know is wrong.

The best policy is to not reg/develop something that could be considered wrong or should belong to someone else.

Agree.

'Legal loophole' probably isn't the best way of saying what was meant. 'Legitimate way of developing these sites' would've sufficed!

 

[newguy]

If it was a tribute site with no ads, I doubt you'd get in too much trouble, other than potentially being asked to give it back. If it's a money maker venture though, it seems like a bad idea to me.