It depends on useage for the most part.. you can bet that 99% of the time, if you're profiting in any way, you're in the wrong. A name doesn't have to be TMed to be protected against exploitation BTW..

I'd like to think that an .info might enjoy a bit of protection as a "news" site and be protected under the 1st amendment.. hm, I wonder.....

Most bands will let you create a fan site they love that sort of thing if you email the contact person of the site telling em they will 9 times out of 10 say yes sure. band love there fans but some bands dont like it so better to ask first.

Motorhead rule lol..

Bands allow fan sites, but regging the exact name of the band would be a TM violation..

Actually, it is TM infringement. If it is a true fan site, you are protected. And it is 100% certain that if you make any money, you are using it in bad faith. So if you have one and want ot make it a fansite, do it...

I would suggest contacting the band before you register the domain, and try to receive their permission beforehand. However fansites are usually allowed, usually even if you do make money from them. If you want an example, look at Offspring.com and TheOffspring.com..

They can do whatever they want if they are looking for the extra cash. It may just be a fansite but they will find something in it to use against you.

Its better to go after big business trademarked domains instead of small...

If you are a cybersquatter and have no morals, this is good advice... go after the big companies... ugh.

As ar as fansites, if you properly utilize and maintain it, the TM holder will almost never prevail in an action. Read some prior decisions. Fansites and "sucks" sites are protected as long as they are done properly.....

DNQuest,.

Next month it's the 3 star club for you, yea?.

Congratz, and thanks for all the help and quality posts.

Oh and So this is a bad thing thing, huh?..

I meant it is better to be in trouble with bigger busineses rather then small. Think about it...

How about if you have a domain name, a .info of an musical artist who died, say a decade ago. Would record companies still come after you?.

Would it matter how long the artist was dead?..

To be honest my opinion that if a band has formed recently (ie within the last 10 years in internet terms) then they shoud wrap the .com (ideal) .net (lucky loser but worth doing) and most of the other main ones up in one hit.

Saves all the hassle then.

If some guy has the nouse to grab another then fair play to them.

I wrapped up everything for my main breadwinning domain name when I started it but forgot .co.uk.

Some fook registered it but I ain't too fussed, my own fault for not regging it in the first instance. He ain't done anything with it. He hasn't even been arsed to park it at a crappy site like Sedo...

I see where you are going with this, but actually, it is better to go after the small TMs, they have less resources and are more willing to settle and less likely to make an example of you. Think about that... Usually with deceased people, there is an estate/trust which would contols all TMs and copyrights or they are transferred to someone else...

Example: nickdrake .com and .info has a note up that says".

"Please note that this web site is not official or affiliated in any way with the Nick Drake estate, Island Records or Witchseason.".

He has affiliate amazon and ebay links up on albums page. Is this little note enough to keep you out of hot water?..

Not legally.. but it depends on the band or their management who and what they want to pursue....