Categories
News Trademarks

Dept. of the Navy files trademark for “SEAL Team” following news of Disney’s “SEAL Team 6” filing

Navy SEAL

A recent trademark filing from Disney for SEAL Team 6 was reported by MediaBistro on May 13.  The story sparked interest and news stories internationally.  

There was speculation among journalists and bloggers about Disney’s plans for the trademark.  The applications range from clothing and toys to entertainment and education products.

However, Disney’s trademark applications may not be as solid as many first thought. 

The same day the story broke that Disney filed three separate trademarks for the phrase SEAL Team 6, The Department of the Navy followed suit by filing for a trademark on SEAL Team.  

The filings are different, but the Navy is definitely taking notice. 

Quick Recap of Events

Osama bin Laden is killed on May 1 by SEAL Team 6.

Disney files trademark applications for SEAL Team 6 on May 3.

On May 13, Media Bistro breaks the news of the Disney filings.

Later that day (on May 13), The Dept. of the Navy files for a trademark on SEAL Team.

SEAL Team Trademark application

Here’s a look at the filing provided by the United States Patent and Trademark Office:

Word Mark SEAL TEAM
Goods and Services IC 200. US 200. G & S: Indicating membership in a(n) to indicate membership in an organization of the Department of the Navy that develops and executes military missions involving special operations strategy, doctrine, and tactics
Standard Characters Claimed  
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number 85320305
Filing Date May 13, 2011
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Owner (APPLICANT) The Department of the Navy agency of the united states government UNITED STATES 875 N. Randolph Street Arlington VIRGINIA 222031995
Attorney of Record Geoffrey M. McNutt
Prior Registrations 3285473
Type of Mark COLLECTIVE MEMBERSHIP MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

At the time of this posting, no one else has reported this news. 

Here’s a screenshot of the filing from USPTO.gov.

SEAL Team Navy Trademark

[UPDATE May 19th, 2011 05:37 PM EST:  Thanks to MediaPost.  MediaPost Raw is the first major news publication to link to this story.]

[Photo of SEAL trainees via Department of Defense]

Categories
News

Hunting Moon tweets about a $1.5 million individual domain name sale in progress

Hunting Moon

In early May, Eric Borgos reported selling 4,000 of his adult domains for $1.3 million.  “The majority of the domains were hand registered by me in the 1990s and the rest were all at least 7-8 years old”, wrote Eric on his company’s website blog

The broker of the 4,000 domain names, is one of the cooler companies with a catchy name and logo: Hunting Moon.

The company regularly tweets using @HuntingMoon to keep people up to date on its sales and newly listed domain names.  When it announced the news of the portfolio sale for $1.3 million, it also stated it had an individual domain name sale in progress in the amount of $1.5 milllion. 

“just wrapped up a $1,300,000 portfolio flip, viva domaining! we have a $1,500,000 individual domain name sale in progress as well”, tweeted Hunting Moon on its Twitter page on May 5.

Yesterday the company announced it sold a $30K dating domain package, among other sales that included bbfx.com for $2,500.

If the sale closes of the $1.5 million domain name, and it’s made public, it would put it in the #1 spot in the YTD Sales Chart for 2011 tracked by Ron Jackson. 

The domain name sale that currently holds the top sales spot is none other than domainname.com at $1,000,000.

Categories
News

KAX Media issues press release about gambling.com purchase; “It was an easy decision given the price”

Poker Chips

Nearly two weeks after being revealed as the buyer of gambling.com by eGaming Review, KAX Media issued a press release briefly describing its $2.5MM purchase of gambling.com.

The company stated it had plans to aggressively grow gambling.com through improvements in conversion rates and more targeted traffic acquisition, and that gambling.com would continue to operate exclusively as a portal for online gambling and only within regulated markets.

Comments on the price

Charles H Gillespie, the KAX chief executive, was quoted in the press release as saying: “Gambling.com ticked all the right boxes and provided an immense amount of intrinsic value. Due to our previous experience looking at similar transactions we realized that it instantly made sense for us and were able to act quickly. 

“It was an easy decision given the price. KAX has a conversion tracking software platform that was purpose built to run this exact kind of site, allowing for an easy transition to our current business and technology platform. We felt that KAX was the perfect organization to maximize the value of Gambling.com,” said Gillespie.

Because the deal involved more than just a domain name changing hands, it doesn’t look like the sale will be topping any domain sales charts in 2011. 

2011 Gambling domain sales

Publicly reported sales of gambling related domains in 2011 have been somewhat slow compared to 2010.  Though the $5.5MM sale of slots.com didn’t take place until June, by this time last year, sales of poker.org for $1MM and poker.com.au for $100,000 had already occurred several months earlier.

Information provided by DN Journal shows a limited number of sales in 2011 in the four figure range and higher. 

To date some of the higher dollar sales include casinos.biz for $19,000, 카지노.kr (IDN) casino in korean for $11,500, onlinebet.gr for $24,167, onlinecasinos.ca for $28,000, sportsbetting.in for $42,300, and a handful of other sales.

If you want to check out the full press release on gambling.com, you can visit the businesswire website.

Categories
News

Toby Clements prepares to launch site

Toby Clements is working on the launch of his website tobyclements.com, to complement his domain newsletter and database of more than 15,000 subscribers.

In early April, Rick Latona who recently posted on his blog that he was entering a three-year program at Harvard Business School, announced that he cut a deal with Toby Clements to divide up his company.  As a result, Toby got 100% ownership of the popular domain newsletter.

Currently, the tobyclements.com website is still undergoing changes, but there is a lot of content available — including information on the newsletter subscription, financing, domain submissions, and more.

According to the bio page on the website, the domain newsletter has done well into the eight figures with sales and acquisitions since 2007. 

Although the site just went online this week, the newsletter under the Toby Clements brand went live earlier this month.

Categories
News Trademarks

Will Facebook get its hands on BuywithFriends.com? It’s expired.

Facebook Buy with Friends

In January, Facebook Commerce Product Marketing announced the coming launch of “Buy with Friends”.  A feature that allow users to share that they’ve made an in-app purchase to their stream, writes Inside Facebook.  Developers can use the “buy with friends” feature to make their promotions or deals more effective, says Facebook.

Not that Facebook needs the domain name buywithfriends.com, but it has expired.

According to GoDaddy, the domain name expired on 05/02/2011 and is pending renewal or deletion.

In 2008, Resort Owners Group abandoned its trademark on “buy with friends”.  The company also looks to be abandoning its domain name: buywithfriends.com.  It’s the current registrant, but maybe not for long.

Registrant:
   Resort Owners Group
   219 Dufferin Street
   Suite 100B
   Toronto, Ontario M6K 3J1
   Canada

   Domain Name: BUYWITHFRIENDS.COM
      Created on: 02-May-08
      Expires on: 02-May-11

Though Resort Owners Group might be giving up on “buy with friends”, another company besides Facebook isn’t.  Two days after Facebook announced its “buy with friends” feature, a company called Tazle applied for a trademark for buying clubs.

Facebook also recently launched Facebook Deals, and as Andrew Allemann of Domain Name Wire pointed out in a story about someone else owning the domain besides the company: “the domain name could be used in a way that damages Facebook’s brand, such as an online sweepstakes that looks like it’s part of Facebook. Or a phishing attempt.”