What is the relation between Trademarks and Domains? For what I have read here, I understood that if I buy a domain of an already registered trademark (in which country, by the way?), I might have a problem at hands. But it is not clear to me what happens if I register a domain when no trademark exists, but then someone registers the trademark (and where?). Can that person sue me and take out the domain, which I bought before she acquired the trademark? Here I quote some of the text from the link above as reference: Warning. Warning. Possible trademark infringement Here’s how it works: Mandated by ICANN for all new gTLDs, the Trademark Claims service warns trademark holders AND domain name registrants (people who register domain names) of possible trademark infringements. First, the service sends a potential domain name registrant a warning notice when they attempt to register a domain name that matches a trademarked word or phrase in the TMCH. Then, if the registrant continues to register the domain name after receiving and accepting the notice, the service sends a notification of the registration to the trademark holder. As реr ICANN ruleѕ, the registrar (like GoDaddy) must notify customers who pre-registered or registered a domain with a trademark claim against it. The customer must acknowlеdgе the claim аgainst their domain in order for us to proceed with the registration of the domain at the registry. The way we notify customers about trademark claims, and how they acknowledge them, depends on whether they registered during Pre-Registration, Early Access or General Availability.
Your quote from GoDaddy is based on ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). UDRP para 4(a) sets out the elements which must be proven for the complaint to be upheld: (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. What if I register a domain when no trademark exists, but then someone registers the trademark? The UDRP does not explicitly address this. However, if the mark did not exist when you registered the domain, it would be difficult for the registration to have been made in bad faith. This has been considered by WIPO (who is one of the larger dispute resolution providers for the UDRP). In particular, WIPO's overview provides: Generally speaking, although a trademark can form a basis for a UDRP action under the first element irrespective of its date [see further paragraph 1.4 above], when a domain name is registered by the respondent before the complainant's relied-upon trademark right is shown to have been first established (whether on a registered or unregistered basis), the registration of the domain name would not have been in bad faith because the registrant could not have contemplated the complainant's then non-existent right. That is, unless the registration was done in bad faith knowing that a mark would soon be registered: In certain situations, when the respondent is clearly aware of the complainant, and it is clear that the aim of the registration was to take advantage of the confusion between the domain name and any potential complainant rights, bad faith can be found. Can that person sue me and take out the domain, which I bought before she acquired the trademark? Yes, though &quot;suing&quot; is probably inaccurate. There is no suit, but merely mandatory administrative proceedings occasioned by a complaint. If the complaint is upheld, the domain may be cancelled or transferred (UDRP para 4(i)). This is not as unfair as it might seem at first blush: if the domain was originally registered in good faith, it will not be transferred even if a trademark is registered later. What country must the trademark be in? It doesn't matter: there must merely be a trademark somewhere. By way of example, WIPO case D2016-2612 was a recent case where a .com domain originally held by a Canadian registrant was transferred to a Turkish complainant based on a Turkish trademark.
It is not required. The companies undoubtedly prefer that you include those designations, and they may even write to say that you should, but that is just them doing their due diligence in policing their brands. In the instances you cited, there is probably some agreement between those companies to include those markers. If you don't have such an agreement, there is no obligation to notify the users of your website that some third party has trademarked a name that you mention.
Your lawyers should understand that you're dealing with a private company that can make and enforce its own policies when it comes to allowing access to the their store. If Google's policy is to require you to do research and diligence on a possible trademark infringement of your App, that's legal, as long as Google's requirements don't not violate local or national laws of the variant of their store. The idea that another company or individual can allege infringement, yet not communicate sufficiently with you or Google, may not seem fair, but as a response to that, Google can play it safe and not open themselves up to liability by removing your App or making you resubmit under a new name. That is outlined in Google's TOS, which you agreed to. Your only recourse is to keep talking to Google and keep trying to contact the complainant.
Do I have to pay taxes if I register the domain but the website income belongs to someone else? No. The person or company who runs, and/or profits from, the business is the entity under obligation to pay all the applicable taxes: Value Added Tax, income tax, corporate tax, and so forth. Unless you charge a significant amount therefor (see the comments), the mere registration of just one domain is unlikely to trigger tax obligations.
Your issue is trademark, not copyright. If these other guys use their mark (product name) in commerce but did not register it, they have an unregistered trademark which you could be infringing. Between two users of the same trademark, the first to use in commerce wins. (There is a territorial component but with the Internet, meh.) If the trademark is registered that gives them a presumption of validity. Trademark infringement is concerned with consumer confusion. If someone uses someone else's trademark in a way that confuses consumers as to the origin of the goods, that's a problem. What this means is that if I make tires with the name Sportie and someone else makes soap also with that name Sportie there is not a high likelihood of confusion. Likewise a hotel in Washington called Runner's Cove probably doesn't infringe a shoe store in Florida with the same name. Fantasy games and fantasy books sold over the Internet? Sounds like a potential problem that you might want to clear up before the second book.
Why do you think Oracle have not been protecting their trade mark? Using a trade mark to describe the product (“Written in JavaScript”, “Seeking JavaScript developer”) is not an infringement and the trade mark owner is under no obligation to, indeed, cannot stop this. Where they are required to defend their trade mark is when it is being used in such a way that there is the risk of confusion that the goods or services could be confused with the trade mark owner’s goods or services. Further, they are not required to defend all breaches, only enough to show that they are actively doing so. Also it is not important that the trade mark be associated with the trade mark’s owner. Do you know who owns the trade mark “Ben &amp; Jerry’s”?
No This summarizes the situation with Disney specifically. The Disney trademarks are so ubiquitous and recognizable as being Disney's and not, for example, yours that your use is bound to create confusion in the minds of the public that your business is in some way associated with Disney. That is the essence of trademark infringement. In particular, where your business has nothing to do with the characters it is clear that you are only using them for the cachet of the Disney reputation. Disney will defend their trademarks - this is not at all unlikely.
You cannot copyright a word or name in and of itself, so you can't sue someone for having a novel titled 13 so long as their novel is distinct from your own. Trademarks can use certain words or word combinations, but often in a way that is stylized or symbolic of a particular unique style and may include font, coloring, and other unique artistic takes. For example, McDonalds cannot copyright or trademark the letter &quot;M&quot; but it can trademark the &quot;Golden Arches&quot; a unique stylized &quot;M&quot; that they use as signage to at all their locations. If the name is a brand of a certain product such, then the name can be trademarked but only with respect to that product. For example, if the Acme Wash-Master is a dish washing machine they can't sue Ace Wash Master, a unique dog bathing system, for using the name &quot;Wash Master&quot; since it's both styled different (Acme uses a dash between words. ACE uses a space) and non-competitive product lines (most people would not wash dishes in a dog bathing device... and one would certainly hope that no dog owners ever said to themselves &quot;Fido stinks and my tub is busted. The dish washer will do in a pinch!&quot;).