I’m amazed that Nissan Motors didn’t eventually get the domain. Normally with sufficient $$$, you can bleed a smaller opponent dry in court. My company had something similar happen to us. We were taken to the Federal Court of Australia by a Florida based educational hardware company in part over a domain. The Australian domain we had, was purchased prior to their registration of Australian trademarks and incorporatio…
What was the outcome? Is it possible to mention the educational hardware company?
I won’t mention the complainant's name, however, you gotta respect their (lawful evil?) tactics.
Taking a previously open-source product manufactured by (the awesome) SparkFun Electronics, “un-open-sourcing” the product, and moving the manufacturing away from the USA to China.
When SparkFun ceased manufacturing the product, the result was that schools in my region are now charged more for this line of products. The complainant's restrictions in their reseller agreements also prevent resellers from selling any competing products.
The complainant trademarked the name of the open-source hardware and obtained a second trademark (in the quoted category below[1]). I am not a lawyer, but it could mean that anyone commercially teaching (hear deriving income directly or indirectly) or creating educational content that incorporates the trademarked term could potentially be violating the trademark.
[1] “Conducting workshops and seminars in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education; developing education lesson plans for others in the field of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education; educational services, namely, conducting informal programs in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education, using on-line activities and interactive exhibits, and printable materials distributed therewith”