Red4Rent Domain Name

[Sim Sadler]

Hi Everyone, I grabbed this domain awhile ago when I intended to buy a Red camera. I never did, so the domain is available. Anyone interested?

Red4Rent.com


simsadler@yahoo.com

 

[Justin McAleece]

pm'ed you

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

ehm i dont think posting on reduser to sell a RED!!!4rent site when you are not from red is not a smart idea

 

[Martin Weiss]

RED said pretty clearly a while ago that a domain name including RED and dealing with cameras would be considered a trademark infringement, and treated as such.

Alas, if you happen to deal with paints, and want to rent out a specific color, you should be fine

But if your plan is to rent out your RED camera, then I would use another domain name. (Besides, RED is a company, and I doubt that it is for rent.)

 

[Mark B.]

RED said pretty clearly a while ago that a domain name including RED and dealing with cameras would be considered a trademark infringement, and treated as such.

Alas, if you happen to deal with paints, and want to rent out a specific color, you should be fine

But if your plan is to rent out your RED camera, then I would use another domain name. (Besides, RED is a company, and I doubt that it is for rent.)

I don't think Red can trademark-control all the sites in the world that might happen to have "Red" tucked into the name, even if those sites are camera-related. If they CAN do that, then we've lost some very fundamental freedoms.

 

[Ed Watkins]

I don't think Red can trademark-control all the sites in the world that might happen to have "Red" tucked into the name, even if those sites are camera-related. If they CAN do that, then we've lost some very fundamental freedoms.

If the site is using the name RED in order to create an unauthorized association with the company/camera and thereby profit from the inclusion of said trademark in their domain then RED have every ability to control that usage.

If the use of the trademark RED, as it applies to video cameras and services, in a domain could conceivably generate trade from, be mistaken for, or cause damage to (including diluting) the RED trademark, then you are out of luck.

I believe the domain red4rent.com , set up with the intent of renting RED cameras, would fit squarely in the domain of RED's trademark unless the site specialized in renting, say, only red colored objects.... not a bad business idea that. :thumbsup:

 

[Mark B.]

If the site is using the name RED in order to create an unauthorized association with the company/camera and thereby profit from the inclusion of said trademark in their domain then RED have every ability to control that usage.

If the use of the trademark RED, as it applies to video cameras and services, in a domain could conceivably generate trade from, be mistaken for, or cause damage to (including diluting) the RED trademark, then you are out of luck.

I believe the domain red4rent.com , set up with the intent of renting RED cameras, would fit squarely in the domain of RED's trademark unless the site specialized in renting, say, only red colored objects.... not a bad business idea that. :thumbsup:

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm just throwing out my opinion and you shouldn't take it as legal advice. In fact, I might be horribly incorrect on every point, so don't use it to guide your actions in any way.

"Red4Rent.com" seems to pretty accurately describe the business activities performed on the site; there are Red cameras being made available for rent. In my opinion, the site name doesn't stand out as being designed to trick customers into thinking that the rental is coming directly from Red. And if there's the potential for misunderstanding, the site owner should be able to simply post in the header or footer, "This site is owned and operated by <company name>. We rent out Red cameras, but we are not affiliated with Red Digital Cinema", or something like that. It should be enough to prevent visitors from getting confused about the businesses involved.

It seems to me, the intent of trademark should be to prevent someone from pawning off a product or service under another company's name. But merely mentioning that another company's product was used to create your own product should be allowed, because it might be relevant to the sale of your own product and it doesn't misrepresent where your product is coming from. If I use a very expensive Steinway piano to make songs, I should be able to use "Steinway" somewhere in my website name. Though, at some point before the user purchases the music I might have to explain to them that, although a Steinway piano was used to make the music, Steinway itself was not involved in the creation of the product. The key is to provide the customer with an understanding of what they're getting, before they buy it. The website name is just a bookmark for finding a website, it doesn't sell anything. The content within the site does sell stuff, and that's where things should be spelled out clearly so the customer understands what they're buying.

Again, that's just my take on it. The courts might disagree with me.

 

[Brent J. Craig]

I think your first paragraph was the only part of your message that was accurate:

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm just throwing out my opinion and you shouldn't take it as legal advice. In fact, I might be horribly incorrect on every point, so don't use it to guide your actions in any way.