Verizon is known to fiercely protect it's trademarks, and they've done so using the US Court system in the past. In 2008 Verizon filed lawsuits against companies like Navigation Catalyst and OnlineNic citing the Lanham Act (cybersquatting ).

With its litigious reputation, I was surprised to see that the company opted to file UDRP disputes at the World Intellectual Property Organization, in lieu of filing lawsuits. As of the present time, Verizon has at least two UDRP complaints pending and a recent victory for domain names that include (among others):

• verizoin.com


• verizonswireless.com


• verizonwieless.com


• verizoon.com


• verizopn.net


• versizon.net


• vewrizon.net


• virazon.com


• verion.com

I have found that when a domain investor owns domain names with generic terms, like NewHouses.com for example, they are generally free and clear of trademark issues, aside from when a bullying company wants the domain name and is willing to take legal action to fight for it. However, there are many terms out there that may seem like they're generic, when in fact they are protected terms that are often vigorously defended by trademark holders.

I am not a lawyer and don't pretend to be one, so take this with a grain of salt. However, I believe that in order to keep a trademark active, the trademark holder must protect its ownership of the mark, so that others can't claim it's free to use by anyone. For example, while Google loves that people are "Googling," they need to protect that term from becoming public domain and prevent others from using it.

In fact, I read something unrelated to domain names, but backs this claim up. In reference to Bud Light's proposed "Fan Cans" with college athletic team colors, Vince Sweeney, Vice → Read More