Ceres
New Member
If you're going to purchase a domain for $1.4 million, it's important to carry out due diligence. Domain Name Wire reports that the sale of Ad.com has fallen through as there appears to be 6 pending trademark applications at the USPTO for the mark "Ad.com." A little reminder before reading on: AOL purchased Advertising.com in 1994.
The first trademark application was filed on 24th September 2008 by Platform-A Inc. (an AOL company). It claims a "first use in commerce date" of 2004.
The other 5 applications were filed on 31st May 2009 (after the auction) but which claims a "first use in commerce date" of 1993. These 5 applications were filed by a company called "Ad.com Interactive Media, Inc." I wonder if this company is also related to AOL because if you look at AOL's website, you'll see it has a program called "Ad.com Network" :
The owner of Ad.com is now suing Directi and Skenzo for backing out of the auction purchase. Assuming the pending applications is the reason for Directi/Skenzo backing out, then failing to carry out due diligence when appropriate is a hard lesson to learn.
I don't know that the 6 pending applications for "Ad.com" will actually be approved for registration. It's hard to believe that they can actually trademark the term "Ad.com" in association with advertising-related services. But time will tell how strong these applications really are...
The first trademark application was filed on 24th September 2008 by Platform-A Inc. (an AOL company). It claims a "first use in commerce date" of 2004.
The other 5 applications were filed on 31st May 2009 (after the auction) but which claims a "first use in commerce date" of 1993. These 5 applications were filed by a company called "Ad.com Interactive Media, Inc." I wonder if this company is also related to AOL because if you look at AOL's website, you'll see it has a program called "Ad.com Network" :
Source: Where Ads Run/Advertising.com | platform-a.comAd.com
With Platform-A's vast Ad.com Network, you can meet virtually any marketing objective.
The owner of Ad.com is now suing Directi and Skenzo for backing out of the auction purchase. Assuming the pending applications is the reason for Directi/Skenzo backing out, then failing to carry out due diligence when appropriate is a hard lesson to learn.
I don't know that the 6 pending applications for "Ad.com" will actually be approved for registration. It's hard to believe that they can actually trademark the term "Ad.com" in association with advertising-related services. But time will tell how strong these applications really are...