I only brought up the suggestion because of a post on another thread about blatant mis-use of it. The post has since been edited several times, but if you saw the “original” post, you would understand.
Actually, I’m pretty sure it is Squadhelp’s policy that once you’ve been paid by the contest holder, the name becomes their IP and you can’t use it again or register it even if they choose not to.
From their Rules & Guidelines for Contest Holders:
"Every entry submitted to your contest belongs to the Creative who originally created it, until that entry is selected as the winner of your contest or a bonus is sent (see details below).
You automatically own the entry that you select as the winner of your contest."
True but it doesn’t mean it has to be revealed to the public to cash on. If the CH doesn’t want it then the rights should logically revert back to the creative, that’s the protection we are talking about.
I wasn’t arguing in favor of unregistered names being revealed publically. I was just making the point that them being hidden is to protect the CH’s rights, not the Creative’s, and that even the Creative registering the name if the CH doesn’t would be against Squadhelp’s rules as far as I know. Squadhelp’s policy is that once a winner is chosen and paid, the rights to that name belong to the CH even if they don’t want them. There is no “reverting back to the creative.” It would be kind of nice if there was some policy that if the CH says they’re not going to use the name or if they fail to register it after XX period of time, the rights go back to the creative or maybe Squadhelp registers the name on their behalf and puts it in the marketplace. But as of right now, that’s not the case.
I did realize that is why you posted this suggestion. However, I still disagree with using terms like this and “bad apples” to refer to fellow creatives who register domain names they know have been used by others. It is not a blatant misuse at all. This is a competitive environment and that is the basis of everything we do here. Squadhelp allows us to submit unreg domains to the marketplace and they have no rule about whether or not the name has been used by others or that only the first person to use it gets to do it. The only criteria is that the individual creative who subs the name for approval for premium (or buys it and subs it for approval) is that the individual creative needs to have their own high ratings on that name. Furthermore, no creative ever knows who thought of that name first. Having that information also helps guide us and makes us find other names that have not been used before.
This subject is vastly different than creatives that Squadhelp have identified as registering winning names from contests and the rule about not showing those names to us. SH trusted us, and some Tier A creatives took advantage so they stopped revealing them. This subject is also vastly different than discussing other registration issues we are not allowed to discuss here.
As @AbleBrands said, SH has encouraged us to protect our names by buying them. If we are unable to make those investments, then we live with the consequences. SH also has their reasons for implementing things like fun facts and they are doing their best to keep us thinking outside of the box.
Sorry, disagree. I don’t think it is appropriate to discuss this practice either. You personally have many times urged Creatives to stop discussions because it might “give people ideas”. I feel this conversation is just as damaging to the platform.
Is this stated somewhere, Commulinks? I suppose it makes sense, but sometimes I have names that I think are great ideas regardless of whether they’ve gotten any good ratings in a contest yet, so I submit them for consideration for premium. If that’s a requirement, it seems I’ve been wasting my time and points.
It sort of is… you have to get so many high ratings to move a name up and SH does take that into account. But you are right that it isn’t a hard and fast policy. (Domainers that come here aren’t held to that).
Yes I have. On the “other” issue. And that policy is in place to keep people from slamming customers in the forum. I say what I say to stop people from doing it - yes. Because doing that is wrong, based on SH rules.
You are assuming what Jackie is assuming - that people who do this are doing something wrong. It is not wrong. There is no rule anyone is breaking. And if people get an idea from this so be it - because it is not wrong. You ask for ideas on things all the time yourself. People give you ideas in spite of the competitive disadvantage in doing so. I did not start this conversation and I do not agree with your and Jackie’s assumption that people who do this are wrong in doing so.
Perhaps you should check your own marketplace names and see how many times they were subbed to contests by others…because this happens all the time, whether intentionally or not. If you deliberately checked to make sure they were never used by anyone else before subbing, then you put your own self at a competitive disadvantage because someone else probably did.
Like I said, several of “my” names (not mine because I didn’t buy them) have sold in the marketplace by others or are listed. Their win, my loss, I should have subbed them.
@Commulinks I did not say registering names that others have thought of as well is wrong. I do think registering names specifically and solely because you see they have been thought of before is sketchy at best. That is my opinion. Jackie has as much right to suggest something as anyone. You have the right to express your side, as do I. It is Squadhelp’s place to decide.
Yes, you have the right to suggest. I never said you didn’t.
I am saying there is no policy against it. I am saying I do not see it as wrong, either. And there would be no way for SH to implement such a policy with millions of names in the system. We are also allowed to talk about it. If you don’t like the idea, don’t do it.
Believing something is sketchy doesn’t make it so. And those of us who have names in the marketplace better make sure we are so “pure” if it is a sketchy practice. Because I am positive hardly anyone is.
I will say the same thing again, if you want to protect your names, buy them. Don’t expect SH to create a policy that keeps others from registering any available names because you don’t want to. That is what this is about.
@Communlinks, who suggested a policy like that? I’m not sure why you have drawn such a line in the sand about this. As for your inferences, I submit names to the marketplace when I see they are being liked often when I suggest them in contests. That’s it. I don’t use the “fun facts” in that way, or any other tbh. Now I am done with this topic. Have a great day.
Oh, I see, you’re talking more about getting a name promoted from Basic/Basic Plus to Premium. And I suppose it makes sense there’s probably a similar consideration on SH’s part when considering unregistered names for the marketplace.
Friends, I do not see any problem at all from the perspective of the development of human society and the laws of commerce. If a very beautiful dress is sold in a boutique of your city, then no one curse the person who bought it. Everyone saw this dress, many liked this dress. But the one who became the first and bought it won this race. I have many good names registered here by my colleagues. But I do not blame anyone. This is healthy competition. So this name was not so important to me. It means that the stars are arranged in such a way that the purchase has become unavailable to me. In turn, I can also register a domain that another creative considered his favorite. Do not blame me too. Live here and now. Be happy and do not regret what did not come true.
Very well put @Edukar.
@grant I am still seeing a lot of names that are not real nor single word names in the “real words” category (as shown below). Isn’t this category for dictionary word domains?? Is this issue being worked on? You didn’t reply to my previous post about it so was wondering if you guys have taken note of this.
6 in the top 12 -> SoulBlush (first on the page even before galore and exactly), IndigoBull, LilyAndTulip, TweeBit, Plantoid & BloomNatura. Has no one noticed this yet?? To replicate I just clicked on the Real Word category (see bottom left) in the Marketplace home.
Not showing unregistered winning names is not protecting the creative’s rights. It’s protecting the buyer’s rights. Before, when the names were shown before they were actually registered by the buyer (CH), some people (bad apples) would register and buy the name before the CH. The net effect was that the CH was paying for a name they couldn’t use.
If your name is chosen as the winner by the CH and you are paid, then that name is no longer yours to submit to other contests. It’s now the property of the CH who paid for it and they can do with it what they will for as long as their Squad Help contract says.
How does one ‘own’ a name in your opinion?
That is a really good question, right? But the answer is not my opinion. It’s how owning ideas works in business. We are purveyors of ideas here. There are billions of people in the world, many having ideas and often the same ideas at the same time. So in order to own an idea in the world at large and prevent anybody else from using that idea, the person who trademarks or patents the idea owns it. They have to go through the gauntlet of proving it is theirs. And even in trademarks and patents, there is still not a 100% way to prevent others from having a similar idea and you have to fight infringements legally.
Here, we can own real estate (a domain). But we can’t own the complete idea unless we trademark it. And we don’t do that.
It is astounding in the world of ideas how many people come up with the same idea for a widget at the exact same time. And it is not the first person who thought of it who owns it. It’s the person who trademarked or patented it. And with patents, you can own only that portion of your idea that has not been patented (or a patent on that idea has expired). So for example, Squadhelp cannot own the idea of crowdsourcing. They may be able to own a patent on the technology they use, though. But probably only parts of it…
So here we do not own ideas. The first person who has an idea is still not the owner of the idea. Someone else in the world may have already had that idea. The person who copyrights, trademarks or patents that exact idea owns it.
Here’s an interesting articles about it involving famous brands:
We can own a domain name because we purchased it in that exact spelling and can sell it to someone who wants to own that domain. From there, they own the domain name and maybe can own the idea itself if they trademark it.
So I should have said, the “domain” doesn’t belong to you until you buy it, right? For our purposes here, that is probably how I should have worded that.
I was trying to find an article about the word Montana, which I believe was trademarked. I vaguely remember a big story about that and I can’t find it.
So… if you were asking because the conclusion is that you cannot own a name here, you are right.
I’m totally confused by this thread… I was under the impression that if the fun fact popped up that it was to discourage use of the name 1) acception; it sometimes says you can still submit.
I have a suggestion to the SH team. If for several months in a row all requests are rejected, how else can we bring own domains to the market? We know that we can spend points to put premium domains in the top positions. Let’s make it so that by paying 500-1000 points, creative can transform the Basic listing plus domain to premium domain. Thus, the accumulated points will help those domainers who have a lot of rejected but promising domains.