realestate1.com.au

[StuartB]

for anyone interested in following the judgement on this case, there is a good wrap-up by the legal firm here:

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9debe5d7-4e28-429c-b065-6f622da40a43

Lots of lessons here for Domainers.

 

[snoopy]

however, there is a real danger of confusion in relation to "realestate1.com.au". In the context of domain names and the scanning process that occurs when looking at a search results page, the "1" in realestate1.com.au is not very distinctive and was likely to be missed. As a result, the realestate1.com.au domain name was deceptively similar to realestate.com.au and constituted trade mark infringement.

Right decision but bad logic in my view. "1" isn't very distinctive and neither is "realestate". I think with both domains taken together , ie realcommercial1.com.au the infringement is pretty clear though.

 

[StuartB]

I agree. "1" is not distinctive when compared with a location, such as "RealEstateTownsville".
(Although not sure why anyone would want to live in Townsville - except Fussy Ned)
The logic seems to be that "realestate" is a word, but "realcommercial" was the term.

 

[johno69]

I wonder why they haven't had a whinge about wwwrealestate.com.au then.

 

[Ash]

I wonder why they haven't had a whinge about wwwrealestate.com.au then.

Probably in their sights now they have a precedent to follow. Plus, realestate1 is a functioning site that could retain visitors and become a threat.

 

[CyberClick]

real estate is a generic term and as such realestate.com.au should never have been eligible for a trademark (I know a few trademark attorneys that think it's laughable).

Correct me of I'm wrong but my understanding is they were only able to attain the trademark by arguing recognition based on spending 100's of 1000's on advertising.

Small business operators take note; Australian IP law is firmly weighted to big corporates. Sorry innovative sme's and entrepreneurs