It is no secret that US presidential candidates are prepared to
spend millions on promoting their brand and securing the highly
sought after position as the country's leader. However, as one
candidate recently learnt, it only takes a nominal amount to
embarrass your opponent whilst promoting your own brand at the same
An interesting twist in the US presidential battle between Jeb
Bush and Donald Trump provides an invaluable lesson to all brand
Jeb Bush's official presidential campaign is branded
"JEB2016" (as depicted in the logo below) and consistent
with this branding, Bush had registered and was using the domain
It is common for candidates to adopt catchy slogans or logos
(who could forget "KEVIN07"). However, one vital mistake
Jeb Bush made in his campaign was failing to ensure that he had
ownership and control of the domain name "JebBush.com."
It was recently discovered that an unknown user, suspected to be a
Trump supporter, has full ownership of the web address,
"JebBush.com". Up until recently, JebBush.com returned
blank searches. However, the owner of the domain has now redirected
all traffic to Trump's official Presidential campaign. Not only
does this frustrate online users searching for information on Jeb
Bush, it is quite simply, embarrassing. Failing to properly plan
and protect his own Intellectual Property may also cause voters to
question his ability to lead a country.
Social media user names, domain or account names are generally
issued on a first-come, first-serve basis. As in the Bush example,
another company or person may register your name or a name
deceptively similar to yours as their social media name. This may
result in unauthorised use of your trade marks. It may also prevent
you from obtaining registration and could potentially compromise
your on-line presence and reputation. In this case, it not only
exposed Bush to online trolls poking fun but also directed his
supporters to his competitor.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Differences in the expectations of suppliers and customers regarding the development of bespoke software, frequently lead to disputes regarding development timeframes, scope, cost, and intellectual property ownership.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).