Sunday, 9 November 2008

Thoughts of the week (Week 6, or, er, something)

Well, no T3 again for now. Last week I reported that Terminator had perhaps got him: but don't fret! He's since been reported alive and well with Saturday Night Fever star John Travolta in the depths of the Outer Bangolia flying tree forest. Anyway, heeeeeeere's some yakking for week starting 9th November.
  • The move is awesome, but there's a few bugs to iron out yet. Still, we seem to be experiencing an upsurge in wiki activity, maybe that just coincided with this momentous occasion but Illogic's definitely been more active of late.
  • It would be nice to take out some official copyright on the Illogicopedia name. Having read a comment on a previous blog post by Greenreaper (Wikifur bigwig), this seems like a cool idea and a step towards making Illogicopedia more professional.
  • Site Improvement Drive. Don't worry, we haven't forgotten about this: it's just been put on a backburner whilst we're on the move. Everything's a bit hectic at the moment but when we settle in you can be sure our effort to make Illogicopedia more appealing to the masses will be in full swing. Stay tuned, and don't touch that alcohol (it's mine).
  • I pimped up the blog sidebar and tidied a few things up. There's now a 'regulars' section and the list of bloggers is now a post in its own right (see previous post). This gives me some room to add a few niceties, like pictures.
Aaaaand that's it for another week. Maybe T3 will be back soon but until then, I'm more than happy to fill in for him. Smell you later.

6 comments:

  1. Service mark, not copyright. Exactly like a trademark, only for a service.

    Your proof of use should consist of advertisements/promotions for the site and/or screencaps of its use, like the specimen here.

    Oh, and something I forgot to mention - even though you have a simple boilerplate usage statement (class 41, "Providing an online publication in the nature of an interactive encyclopedia in the field of X") it costs $275 and takes a bare (and unlikely) minimum of around six months ("WikiFur" took seven), which might not be an insignificant factor.

    Personally, I consider it money well spent.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Also: if you decide not to proceed with registration, you still have rights; however, it's worth gathering all the things that you would need to make a registration, as you will need them to make a credible claim towards anyone who wishes to challenge the exclusive right. The above link can answer other FAQs.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, proof of claim is free, and to be honest, US law, despite what it's lawyers like to think, only applies in the US, to properly service/trademark you would need to apply for the mark in each country. As you can see, a servicemark really doesnt give you that much protection outside the country. Its these sorts of laws that allow Russian websites to sell music at mere pennies per track.

    Hence such protection on a website with no income in any form would be a costly and doubtlessly pointless investment.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hmm, good point Seppy. I like the idea of setting up a statistics pool like Wikifur's though.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Desciclopédia had to go to arbitration for its .org name because of Wikia. With many desciclopedia-related domains already cybersquatted by linkspammers, Wikia registered both the .net and .info in 2007 and continues to point them basically nowhere.

    To register desciclopedia.pt (due to quirks in that country's registry) meant the name needed to be in one of various categories which confer a legal ownership of a name. It took €100 and a little over a month to get the .pt name in Lisbon, while trademark registration here cost hundreds of dollars more and can take a year or two before the mark is issued.

    Costs and delays vary widely among countries, with Netherlands and Belgium being among the quickest.

    The arbitration case for the .org domain took about eight months and $1000, predictably Desciclopédia won, spammers lost. At least 85% of all UDRP complaints end that way.

    The decision is here: https://www.adndrc.org/icann/iPubdecision.nsf/f047c3e4e8d7221c48256ab000287ab0/034cd1cf5e292fbd4825749e003d5d7b?OpenDocument

    Date of first use of a name is key; registration in any country and evidence of bad-faith use of the name by cybersquatters (such as reporting linkspam-parking and any attempts to resell the domain for extortionate prices) are also invaluable in cases like these.

    ReplyDelete