[Aissen]

> Q: I think you're infringing on my trademark...

> A: If you consult with someone well versed in trademark law, they will tell you that you can't have an exclusive trademark on a common word or name. My husband and I successfully defended ourselves against an attempted domain takeover in 2006; see WIPO Case D2006-0655 for more information.

Well, it depends on the jurisdiction. In France, in the infamous "Milka" case, the opposite happened: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milka_contre_Kraft_Foods (french)

[byroot]

Even in France that wouldn't fly. Milka lost this case because besides having the milka.fr domains, her webdesign was using a color close to the brand one.

As a result the judges ruled that she was piggybacking on the established brand.

If her design was say green instead of purple, she would likely have won the trial.

[Aissen]

Yes, this is one of the reasons cited in the Wikipedia article I linked. Another might be not having the legal resources of a US$ 20-40B company.

[byroot]

> Yes, this is one of the reasons cited in the Wikipedia article I linked.

Which most readers here can't understand. That's why I though it was important to stress it here.

[Aissen]

Thanks.

[rerx]

I guess it depends on how common the name in question really is.

In Germany, a lawyer named Dr. Andreas Shell lost a five-year legal dispute against the petrol multinational and had to hand over "shell.de" in 2001. Amazingly, in 1996 Shell actually was offered the domain at cost, but showed no interest.

Source, German only I am afraid: http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/rechtsstreit-shell-gegen-...

[eriknstr]

I remember reading about that case in a web design magazine. Here's a very short article from the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4348585.stm