Summary: History implies that CPA somehow "your brand through paid search are pilfering subsidiaries". Starts from the premise: Type "Columbia House" in Google and see scores of sites by using "Columbia House" (a trademarked term) draw traffic to your affiliate site making money House for leading people back to Columbia. The problem is as House, describe affiliate of Columbia product offerings must somehow and Columbia House wants to beat to bring bushes for more people to your door.
Years ago it was a domain dispute for Webergrills.com where a Weber dealer introduced by UDRP for assorted name of the manufacturer. The manufacturer lost because the merchant express authority order to advertise the Weber brand was given its licensing. Result that precedent? If you HondaCars.com own and you're a Honda car dealer, doing nothing wrong.
Are affiliate relations relating to paid search, really different? When you sign up as an affiliate of Columbia House, is that "Manufacturer" express authority to promote your brand give you? This is much different than "Columbia House" keyword traffic buying and selling it to "Itunes".
Where is the line concerning the domain name? If you lead a hypothetical company called DealerDomainNames.com and to various manufacturer's dealer (as your usual business) in the deployment and management of domain names who act in good faith could be by using a basket of brand, with domain name for resale? Make a valid legal argument for keeping these names could?
I don't plan cover slide, but an interesting thought all the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment