- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Well.
I agree with the extra restrictions on domains that hook on their brand name.
Although it might seem a viable advertising method – and done well it does not harm – many of those sites are a very poor reflection of the brand.
Brand name protection on the net is becoming a hot item.
As for the second part about Google search terms – that might be going to far. I;m not sure that PartyPoker have a right to restrict the poker term – and if they don’t want the traffic then affiliates will simply send it somewhere else.
As for your main question – is it getting worse?No. I think it’s being spelt out in more detail – as programs learn what is right and what is wrong – and personally I’d rather have it all spelt out in the contractual details upfront.
:thumbsup:Is it not the same issues with domains, that I simply send the traffic elsewhere? If I’m not allowed to send the traffic from my pokerxyz.org domain to pokerxyz.com I’ll just send it to pokeraaa.com hence bad for the company that owns the brand.
When it comes to badly looking sites for the brand it is stated in the agreements that it is not allowed to say that it is an official site and use the look and feel of the brand except banners provided by the operator so that should be covered without the domain name restriction.
/George
I wouldnt promote Party poker anyway.. or any party gaming site.
The problem may arise if they decide to come after you for the domain, when their name is involved, especially if you’re sending the traffic elsewhere.
What court or jurisdiction that would be involved I have no idea, but it could be a headache. If you have such a domain, you may want to trying selling it to them, rather than losing money or sleep over it. If you have considerable, quality traffic, it is a very good selling point.
jojjewestin wrote:Is it not the same issues with domains, that I simply send the traffic elsewhere? If I’m not allowed to send the traffic from my pokerxyz.org domain to pokerxyz.com I’ll just send it to pokeraaa.com hence bad for the company that owns the brand./George
Hey George.
I don’t think it’s the same thing at all – after all brand name registration and trademarks are a fact of life in the commerical world – and we’ve seen plenty of recent decisions were the established brand name wins the right to protect.
So while poker can’t be protected – its a generic term – partypoker can be.
In the REAL world you can’t setup a shop called (say) coca cola traders and push pepsi or other colas. That’s breaching the trademark as you’re attracting custom pretending to represent a company that you don’t.
Agreed?
Yes, I agree with the difference, the brand isn’t used so much in the search engine promotions. Do you know if there are any cases that we can read about concerning these domain name issues where they have been legaly issued. I’m wondering if the companies can have global protection, I mean, the swedish law should obay for me since I live here, i guess Coca cola and McDonalds can have a global protection because of their well known brands but i doubt that one can say that gambling companies have such global awareness among people, yet atleast…
/George
Although it might seem a viable advertising method – and done well it does not harm – many of those sites are a very poor reflection of the brand.
That about sums it up.
