Sites that use the GamTrak brand

[AussieDave]

This is not directed at you Dave.

Hi Robin,

I know your frustrated and annoyed. I also know what it's like to build a brand too.

All I'm saying is try not to let yourself get caught up in chasing phantoms.



Cheers



Dave

[matted]

I wouldn't write off the top10casinoguide.com problem... Take a look at the source code. They are using MY meta description and keywords verbatim in their headers. What ethical purpose can that serve?

[mojo]

I wouldn't write off the top10casinoguide.com problem... Take a look at the source code. They are using MY meta description and keywords verbatim in their headers. What ethical purpose can that serve?

I also think that encouraging Robin to abandon the fight because there might or might not be something wrong sends a message that it is ok to do this and no one is going to fight it. Wrong.

Whether it is harmful or not, which I think it is, if we say don't bother fighting it I shudder to think the results.

[arkyt]

Have you found any domain variations yet? You know - online-gamtrak.com or gamtrak-gambling-guide.net etc sites which clearly were created based on your success?

[GamTrak]

Have you found any domain variations yet? You know - online-gamtrak.com or gamtrak-gambling-guide.net etc sites which clearly were created based on your success?

What the hell difference does it make? It's NOT for them to use. Do you think they are using it to help me? Get a clue for christ sake! Why should I have to waste my time and do that? NO ONE has the right to use my brand that I worked so hard on PERIOD. It's that attitude that has us in this mess in the first place!

If you don't have anything of value to add then please don't POST in my thread because you're upsetting me!

[brean78]

wow, I thought arkyt was trying to help you. If you start turning on people that are trying to help you out you may find this a lot harder.

I really am confused as to how they are stealing traffic. I would like to know, because I hope to have some strong affiliate brands of my own at some point.

I have googled "gamtrak" and "www.gamtrak.com" and could find none of these listings for several pages.

Are they doing PPC or using your brand in other ways? I am genuinely interested as you seem very annoyed about these people. If you take this one step further you could find yourself persuing Alexa, who.is, aboutus.org etc...

I am sure you have better things to do

[MichaelCorfman]

What the hell difference does it make? It's NOT for them to use. Do you think they are using it to help me? Get a clue for christ sake! Why should I have to waste my time and do that? NO ONE has the right to use my brand that I worked so hard on PERIOD. It's that attitude that has us in this mess in the first place!

It does make a difference. If someone uses your trademark within their domain name then you have a very strong legal argument most of the time, and so it does make a difference from a legal perspective. Domain names are typically used to identify goods and services provided on a site, and when that is the case such use can constitute direct trademark infringement.

However, when a domain name is used as part of a fan site name relating to the trademark, then trademark law may not prevent use of the trademark name as part of the domain name. There are well known examples where <trademark>sucks.com is registered, and, obviously, no trademark holder is likely to be happy with this situation. Here is one example: www.chillingeffects.org/weather.cgi?WeatherID=320. At least within the US there are sometimes conflicts between perceived trademark rights and freedom of speech rights, and legally freedom of speech carries a lot of weight within the US legal system.

However, many folks will make changes when requested, independently of the strength of the legal argument, especially if they believe complaints will be lodged with Google if they don't. So, I'd like to be clear that in no way am I trying to say you should not ask - at least some of the time asking will yield success. And I can tell you from experience, that independent of the legal relevance, saying you have a registered trademark on a term does increase the level of attention that is paid to complaints on the part of at least some folks.

Michael

[MichaelCorfman]

While I think the top10casinoguide website is a pretty useless site, It is not clear to me that there is anything fundamentally unethical about what they have done. Stupid, yes, unethical, no.

There is nothing wrong with building directory sites, and I don't believe there is any legitimate ground for demanding that a site be removed from a directory site. In the case of this particular directory, at least they do link from the site image to the site, so at least a link is provided.

I've realized I should have worded what I quoted above from an earlier post in this thread differently. I certainly don't want to be taking a pro top10casinoguide stand with respect to their ethics. What I should have said is "illegal, no" rather than "unethical, no" and "nothing illegal" rather than "nothing wrong." There are plenty of things that are unethical and wrong that are not illegal.

Michael

[AussieDave]

There are plenty of things that are unethical and wrong that are not illegal.

That nails it.

Hi GamTrak,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark

This pretty much explains it better than what I can.

But I'll add this...

We all know Coke (the drinking kind)... If I was to launch a product called Koca-Kola but attempted to ride the success of Coca-Cola and use this brand to sell Koca-Kola then that IMO would be a breach of Trademark. Of course that may also depend (?) if I Coca-Cola held a Trademark for their product in that specific country.

I also think that encouraging Robin to abandon the fight because there might or might not be something wrong sends a message that it is ok to do this and no one is going to fight it

If Robin discovers that she does indeed have a case then I agree...go for it. Try to do this yourself because once you get hire legal representation the $'s will stack up fast.

Really unless you have a solid case and a case that will produce results, the sad truth is the only people to win here are the lawyers.



Cheers



David

[AussieDave]

What can we do Dave and what organization currently has the means to do it?

I don't have the answers...

I know your frustrated and maybe that's because you need to read up on what your rights are as a TradeMark holder.

But I just figured that there is no point getting all bent out of shape when all that energy is being wasted.

All I'm asking is that you take a step back and try not to let your emotions carry you into a rage....


Cheers



Dave

[lots0]

There is such a thing as "Fair use" of a Trademark.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_us...ademark_law%29

In other words I (or anyone) can use any trademark as part of their right to freedom of speech.

You can not attempt to make money directly using the trademark, but you can say what you want about the trademark holder and the trademark.

Anyone can use the trademark in the proper context(Fair use) and there is NOTHING the trademark holder can do about it.

Owning a Trademark does not give the trademark holder the right to impede someone's freedom of speech.

[brean78]

Really unless you have a solid case and a case that will produce results, the sad truth is the only people to win here are the lawyers.

This I think is the best advice of the day.

IMO a much better strategy would appear to be working with affiliate managers to flag such sites so if they do have tracking links then they should be made redundant. If they have gambling related content they shouldnt be getting money from other ads, not US sites anyway.

The same strategy has worked well with sites that have scraped/duplicate content and I cant see why it wont work here.

[matted]

So two issues I see here...

1. Is it serious enough to consider legal action?
2. Is it ethical?

The problem is, this individual appears to be trying to profit from others work (including their trademarks) just hasn't done a particularly good job. So they probably aren't stealing too much traffic... it is unclear what google things with the copied description meta tag.

I can't afford a lawyer - and honestly dont feel it has gotten to that point. But the fact is that this website appears to have had the intent of stealing traffic. I see no other reason why they would copy meta tags.

[lots0]

...I see no other reason why they would copy meta tags.

Most all directory scripts make use of the meta tags of the sites they list.

The main reason meta tags were created in the first place... was for directory's and search engines to use when listing and categorizing websites.

Please don't misunderstand me, I am not defending this guy... I have not even looked at his site.

But the idea that you think he is up to no good just because he is using meta tags as they were intended to be used.. is a bit much.

[GamTrak]

GamTrak is posted on many sites. That's NOT the issue or problem! DUH!

The point of this thread is to record sites that use the GamTrak brand in an effort to divert traffic nothing more and nothing less. I'm no SEO expert and don't know what is seen as 'OK' and I don't care about that. If I list a site that is 'ok' then so be it. How I decide to proceed is not relavant or important.

This type of behavior is wrong no matter if it is legally enforceable or not.

Like I said, if you can't add what I see as value to MY thread then start your own and take the games with ya because I'm going to continue listing the sites and will ask that the thread me split of BS.

Thanks!

[universal4]

I agree that just because a place is using a meta does not automatically make it wrong, and its ok that lots0 posted this, as I feel he added an opinion like a few others have.

He is correct in that some directory type sites use a similar fashion in placing listings.

I do not know how bad some of these sites are since some are providing a link back to your site.

I agree, if the intent of these sites are to take traffic away from you, then yes it would be wrong of them, but I think in some cases individuals are building sites in such a way as to just fill them with content any way they can and often they are doing so in a way that does actually fall under the "fair use" guidelines.

I tend to lean a bit more toward the side of some of this being wrong, but in the eyes of the law maybe not.

The above is my opinion.

Rick
Universal4

[lots0]

Gee gamtrak I though we had made up and were friends...

But I guess that was only because you wanted something from me.
But after I would not help you out.. I am now trespassing on YOUR thread.. truly amazing.

I am curious about this being "Your thread"... Yours in a public forum and you are allowed to decide who can contribute and what they contribute? You gotta be kidding me...

***

You say you don't care what is right or wrong or what is widely accepted as best practices(Fair use)... all you want to do is list sites that put up your (not yet trademarked)"name" even though the site is likely following established fair use.

You are accusing these sites of stealing 'your' name, but you don't know even the basic rules and have said you don't care about them... Who is in the wrong here?

When I try to inform you of the rules you tell me I am trespassing on 'YOUR" thread... Unbelievable.

[arkyt]

wow, I thought arkyt was trying to help you. If you start turning on people that are trying to help you out you may find this a lot harder.

Yes that is correct, I haven't a clue as to why the post I made deserved the follow-up it received; because there was absolutely nothing in my post that should have triggered it.

Fact is people leech off of others domains all the time - further fact is that GPWA awards those leechers seals of approval despite the fact that they are leaching off of another webmasters successful domain.

IMO, if another webmaster went out and registered online-gamtrak.org for instance to monetarily benefit off your established name - then IMO they are 100% unethical. They should not be given BS certificates of approval that validate their opportunist tendancies. Sorry for trying to bring light on a very related issue - I'll step out of your private thread now - sorry for trespassing - LMAO!

[AussieDave]

I agree that just because a place is using a meta does not automatically make it wrong, and its ok that lots0 posted this, as I feel he added an opinion like a few others have.

He is correct in that some directory type sites use a similar fashion in placing listings.

If a directory or SE uses site meta data or even a snippet of it content to allow its alog to rank the site into its listing(s), I see no issue with that. Google does it and I don't see anyone contesting that fact.

What I do take issue to are those quasi SE's that are set-up for the purpose to use the aforementioned data to gain SERPS in major SE's, with the intention of drawing traffic to these listing for the sole purpose of gaining banner exposure and people clicking on these links to feather their own greed.

Reiterating if there is no ulterior motive and the action is purely done for the purpose (lets say) of using it in a secondary SE & or directory, EG - xxxhttp://www.anoox.com for instance, I wouldn't be concerned.

If however this is not the case then I would be concerned and would see this as a issue that needs addressing. Because it is clear that the intention of the site owner is to steal your traffic.


Cheers



Dave

[brean78]

That would all make sense if the brand in question was driving the sort of searches that would make this worthwhile. I hate to rain on the parade, but it is nowhere near.

Example:

Global monthly searches according to Google kw tool:

gamtrak 1,600
party poker 368,000

For a site owner (or even multiple site owners) to be making revenue off the gamtrak brand, considering none of them appear in the top 10 in Google, Bing or Yahoo, is just not happening.