domain name and trademark/copyright question

You are a candidate to receiving a cease and desist order, it's really up to the particular trademark holder to decide whether or not to wipe you out.

Just make your content respectful of the brand and don't go overboard investing in what could be a short lived revenue source.

I've heard mentioned that any new domain name containing Ebay for example, automatically receive a legal notice from Ebay.

You're very likely to get a cease-and-desist order from the trademark holder. That said, that doesn't mean they're in the right.

Generally, this falls under the area of "fair use" of trademarks. However, ICANN has a history of being a little more favorable to trademark holders than the courts are. I suggest reading ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (sorry, new here - can't post the link - Google it). In particular, you're required to submit to an administrative proceeding if the trademark holder files a complaint alleging that:

(i) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and

(ii) you have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

(iii) your domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

Clearly, (iii) is really what's in question. So, what constitutes "bad faith"?

(i) circumstances indicating that you have registered or you have acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of your documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or

(ii) you have registered the domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that you have engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or

(iii) you have registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or

(iv) by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location.

Let's look at these in plain English:

(i) is basically "domain squatting".

(ii) If you just bought "fordtrucks.com", you might be OK, but if you also bought "fordcars.com" and "fordsuvs.com", etc., that would be a problem.

(iii) If you're an irate customer and buy "fordsucks.com", that's fine. If you're Chevrolet, it's not.

(iv) This is usually the point they'll try to get you on. Are you trying to create a likelihood of confusion? With "review" in the domain, that seems like a pretty tough argument for them to make. They obviously wouldn't be reviewing themselves. What you might do is make sure that your title tag and meta description include something like "independent" or "third-party" that clearly prevents any possible confusion.

P.S. - I've been through this on three domains and never had any of the trademark holders pursue it past my reply to their C&D letter. And I didn't use a lawyer -- I just studied trademark fair use doctrine (see Stanford Copyright & Fair Use Center) and ICANN policy very thoroughly and used the language and precedent cases in my response letter.

Your only smart move from here is to ask for permission and if the company grants it, get it in writing. But don't worry. It's not likely they're going to give you permission as the trademarks of big companies are closely guarded and not often "licensed" out to unknowns.

Just email them and ask. I've asked many companies about this and except for 1 they've always said yes.

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...es-domain.html

The best thing to do is to ask the company. They own the trademark. It's the only way you will know whether or not they will allow it.

Thanks to davezan for the link to the other thread. There IS an attorney (kindsvater) replying in there, and you'll see that his answer is pretty much the same as mine: