Nissan Motors Vs. Nissan Computer

[tami]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: SuperTool
99.99...% of people who type in nissan.com are not looking for nissan computers. I don't see any computers sold on that website. The guy is cybersquatting, expecting a payout from Nissan for the domain name.

:thumbsup:

Either the guy puts up a reputable site for his PC business, or Nissan Autos should have a chance at getting the name. Cybersquatting is worthless.

i hate to inform you, daniel (and others, so i'm not singling you out), that nissan computers WAS selling computer services on his site BEFORE he was sued. once he was sued, he was told to stop offering any commercial services because for some reason, they saw it as a conflict of interest (commercial interests, i suppose).

so no, it's not cybersquatting. he was simply told he could NOT offer any services and has complied with that request while this issue is being resolved.

 

[helo7050]

In another example of Nissan Motor's flexing its corporate might, age old eminent domain laws have been rewritten in Mississippi allowing the State to take land and homes from local landowners for the sole private benefit of Nissan Motors. How the State of Mississippi was "convinced" to change these laws is unclear, but it is clear that local individuals are being deprived of their property rights so Nissan Motors can build its own plant.

 

[Passions]

Originally posted by: tami
first of all, nissan is a hebrew name for one of the months on a jewish calendar. that said, the name "nissan" as a jewish name (uzi nissan is jewish) has been around for about 3000 years.

i doubt nissan cars were around that long.

if nissan (motors) wanted that domain name, they should have purchased it before uzi nissan did.

and again, what's with people bringing up OLD news to the forums?

Stupid. Everyone knows that Nissan is a Japanese name!!!! I never saw a 350Z rolling off an Israeli assembly line did you????

 

[tami]

nissan computers, 1996
nissan computers, 2000
nissan computers, 2002
nissan computers, 2004

cybersquatting? i think not.

 

[QuitBanningMe]

Originally posted by: helo7050
In another example of Nissan Motor's flexing its corporate might, age old eminent domain laws have been rewritten in Mississippi allowing the State to take land and homes from local landowners for the sole private benefit of Nissan Motors. How the State of Mississippi was "convinced" to change these laws is unclear, but it is clear that local individuals are being deprived of their property rights so Nissan Motors can build its own plant.

I don't know how or why. MS has signs on the interstate with "free land for your business".

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
99.99...% of people who type in nissan.com are not looking for nissan computers. I don't see any computers sold on that website. The guy is cybersquatting, expecting a payout from Nissan for the domain name.

He's not technically cybersquatting because Nissan is his name and he owns a business called Nissan. That gives him a valid claim to the domain, and the courts have already said as much. Get a clue.

OTOH, he should just settle. Nissan has repeatedly offered a more than fair price. And this he had the name before the Nissan motors name change is a ridiculous argument. Nissan Motors has always been Nissan motors. They just used to sell under the brand name of Datsun. Kind of like how Fuji Heavy Industries sell under the brand name of Subaru. That doesn't stop them from being FHI.

 

[tami]

Originally posted by: Passions

Originally posted by: tami
first of all, nissan is a hebrew name for one of the months on a jewish calendar. that said, the name "nissan" as a jewish name (uzi nissan is jewish) has been around for about 3000 years.

i doubt nissan cars were around that long.

if nissan (motors) wanted that domain name, they should have purchased it before uzi nissan did.

and again, what's with people bringing up OLD news to the forums?

Stupid. Everyone knows that Nissan is a Japanese name!!!! I never saw a 350Z rolling off an Israeli assembly line did you????

who said that nissan has to refer to a car? nissan is a biblical name. why don't you open up a bible?

 

[Ornery]

Originally posted by: CptObvious

Confusion-based trademark infringement, cybersquatting, and dilution are all separate causes of action (subsections a, b, and c, respectively, of section 43 of the Lanham Act). Just because you're not liable under cybersquatting doesn't mean you're in the clear for the other two.

You're not one of the "couple of tools".

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: helo7050
In another example of Nissan Motor's flexing its corporate might, age old eminent domain laws have been rewritten in Mississippi allowing the State to take land and homes from local landowners for the sole private benefit of Nissan Motors. How the State of Mississippi was "convinced" to change these laws is unclear, but it is clear that local individuals are being deprived of their property rights so Nissan Motors can build its own plant.

you get hold out problems otherwise.

'hmm... everyone around me suddenly sold their houses... i wonder why...? oh, there is a billion dollar plant going here? well i want my cut! i won't sell my one acre for anything less than $100 million!'

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: helo7050
In another example of Nissan Motor's flexing its corporate might, age old eminent domain laws have been rewritten in Mississippi allowing the State to take land and homes from local landowners for the sole private benefit of Nissan Motors. How the State of Mississippi was "convinced" to change these laws is unclear, but it is clear that local individuals are being deprived of their property rights so Nissan Motors can build its own plant.

Many major corporations have been doing this of late. The states are using the argument that the business will be bring in increased tax revenues in order to claim public good and utilize eminent domain to seize private properties. It is blatantly unconstitutional and needs to be stopped.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
you get hold out problems otherwise.

'hmm... everyone around me suddenly sold their houses... i wonder why...? oh, there is a billion dollar plant going here? well i want my cut! i won't sell my one acre for anything less than $100 million!'

So what? It's their property.

 

[Passions]

Originally posted by: tami

Originally posted by: Passions

Originally posted by: tami
first of all, nissan is a hebrew name for one of the months on a jewish calendar. that said, the name "nissan" as a jewish name (uzi nissan is jewish) has been around for about 3000 years.

i doubt nissan cars were around that long.

if nissan (motors) wanted that domain name, they should have purchased it before uzi nissan did.

and again, what's with people bringing up OLD news to the forums?

Stupid. Everyone knows that Nissan is a Japanese name!!!! I never saw a 350Z rolling off an Israeli assembly line did you????

who said that nissan has to refer to a car? nissan is a biblical name. why don't you open up a bible?

So what? Are you saying that Japanese didn't have the name Nissan before biblical times? HAH!!!! SUCH ARROGANCE.

 

[lavaheadache]

I'm trying to think up a domain name that someone will want to buy from me right now.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: lavaheadache
I'm trying to think up a domain name that someone will want to buy from me right now.

Make sure the name is the exact same as your last name and the business that you have owned for the past 20 years.

 

[Thegonagle]

Nissan computers. There was no ill intent on this guy's part. He was not, and is not a domain squatter. Nissan is the guy's name, and the name of his business, and he simply got it first. For Christ's sake, back when his site was up, he even had a link to Nissan Motors near the top of his front page for the people who were looking for cars. (EDIT: Actually, I'm not sure that he did have a link to the car company--I might be thinking of somebody else who was in a similar situation.)

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix
you get hold out problems otherwise.

'hmm... everyone around me suddenly sold their houses... i wonder why...? oh, there is a billion dollar plant going here? well i want my cut! i won't sell my one acre for anything less than $100 million!'

So what? It's their property.

this isn't an absolute property jurisdiction.

 

[QuitBanningMe]

Originally posted by: Passions

Originally posted by: tami

Originally posted by: Passions

Originally posted by: tami
first of all, nissan is a hebrew name for one of the months on a jewish calendar. that said, the name "nissan" as a jewish name (uzi nissan is jewish) has been around for about 3000 years.

i doubt nissan cars were around that long.

if nissan (motors) wanted that domain name, they should have purchased it before uzi nissan did.

and again, what's with people bringing up OLD news to the forums?

Stupid. Everyone knows that Nissan is a Japanese name!!!! I never saw a 350Z rolling off an Israeli assembly line did you????

who said that nissan has to refer to a car? nissan is a biblical name. why don't you open up a bible?

So what? Are you saying that Japanese didn't have the name Nissan before biblical times? HAH!!!! SUCH ARROGANCE.

Yes. Nissan is a combination of the owners namesso I doubt it.

He does say that Nissan was not well known in 1987 because they had previously used the trademark Datsun which is BS.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix
you get hold out problems otherwise.

'hmm... everyone around me suddenly sold their houses... i wonder why...? oh, there is a billion dollar plant going here? well i want my cut! i won't sell my one acre for anything less than $100 million!'

So what? It's their property.

this isn't an absolute property jurisdiction.

No one said it should be. But you're not advocating that someone be forced off their property for the public good or for government use, but so that some company can pick it up at a reduced market price in order to build a facility, simply on the basis that they have already picked up other surrounding properties. Ridiculous. It's obvious government-endorsed theft and only a lawyer wouldn't know it.

 

[helo7050]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix
you get hold out problems otherwise.

'hmm... everyone around me suddenly sold their houses... i wonder why...? oh, there is a billion dollar plant going here? well i want my cut! i won't sell my one acre for anything less than $100 million!'

So what? It's their property.

this isn't an absolute property jurisdiction.

No one said it should be. But you're not advocating that someone be forced off their property for the public good or for government use, but so that some company can pick it up at a reduced market price in order to build a facility, simply on the basis that they have already picked up other surrounding properties. Ridiculous. It's obvious government-endorsed theft and only a lawyer wouldn't know it.

i AGREE

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix
you get hold out problems otherwise.

'hmm... everyone around me suddenly sold their houses... i wonder why...? oh, there is a billion dollar plant going here? well i want my cut! i won't sell my one acre for anything less than $100 million!'

So what? It's their property.

this isn't an absolute property jurisdiction.

No one said it should be. But you're not advocating that someone be forced off their property for the public good or for government use, but so that some company can pick it up at a reduced market price in order to build a facility, simply on the basis that they have already picked up other surrounding properties. Ridiculous. It's obvious government-endorsed theft and only a lawyer wouldn't know it.

obviously you didn't read my hold out explanation.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix
you get hold out problems otherwise.

'hmm... everyone around me suddenly sold their houses... i wonder why...? oh, there is a billion dollar plant going here? well i want my cut! i won't sell my one acre for anything less than $100 million!'

So what? It's their property.

this isn't an absolute property jurisdiction.

No one said it should be. But you're not advocating that someone be forced off their property for the public good or for government use, but so that some company can pick it up at a reduced market price in order to build a facility, simply on the basis that they have already picked up other surrounding properties. Ridiculous. It's obvious government-endorsed theft and only a lawyer wouldn't know it.

obviously you didn't read my hold out explanation.

And how many of them are old folks who've lived in their home for decades and don't want to sell and move out regardless of price?


edit: and a "hold out" price IS the market price. A thing is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. What are you to think otherwise, a socialist?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ElFenix
you get hold out problems otherwise.

'hmm... everyone around me suddenly sold their houses... i wonder why...? oh, there is a billion dollar plant going here? well i want my cut! i won't sell my one acre for anything less than $100 million!'

So what? It's their property.

this isn't an absolute property jurisdiction.

No one said it should be. But you're not advocating that someone be forced off their property for the public good or for government use, but so that some company can pick it up at a reduced market price in order to build a facility, simply on the basis that they have already picked up other surrounding properties. Ridiculous. It's obvious government-endorsed theft and only a lawyer wouldn't know it.

obviously you didn't read my hold out explanation.

And how many of them are old folks who've lived in their home for decades and don't want to sell and move out regardless of price?


edit: and a "hold out" price IS the market price. A thing is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. What are you to think otherwise, a socialist?

well now you're dealing with a bilateral monopoly, which isn't much of a market

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
well now you're dealing with a bilateral monopoly, which isn't much of a market

And a government-mandated sale is?

Tell me... just what is the market value of a property when its entire surrounding neighborhood has already been foreclosed by eminent domain?

 

[Thegonagle]

Eminent domain is obviously being misinterpreted lately. It was not intended for corporate welfare. It was intended to allow for infrastructure to be built.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Thegonagle
Eminent domain is obviously being misinterpreted lately. It was not intended for corporate welfare. It was intended to allow for infrastructure to be built.

which isn't economic welfare?