I guess we can cover discussion of 'metaverse' names here? I know Elad has invested in some names already. Anyone else? I did some searching for available names and all the obvious ones are gone. I was really dissapointed that 'metaperverse' had been grabbed.
Seems to me there is a big differenc between holo and meta. Microsoft branded their headset 'Hololens'. Facebook are going to brand their headsets Meta Quest (etc).
The term 'meta' has not been used before or at least widely, to describe virtual reality, as opposed to metaverse.
The first adult VR site launched under the name "OculusReal****'. They were quickly forced to change it by Facebook.
Having said that, Facebook is trying to claim ownership of the way we describe the new virtual tech, and to make their company synonymous with it. So the more people use metaverse and even meta is good for them,
Much is not /and mis-understood about FB's term META.
It is a company name now. FB shares now trade under a 'meta' ticker.
It is why I bought up in a light way of how well basically they can protect the term in many circumstances. That is something I guess we will see. You will likely see meta (xxxx) for product names since meta by itself will be hard to protect. Much like 'Oculus xxxx' was, for oculus is actually a dictionary term/noun and is a real thing in the real world dating back more than a thousand years.
I might mention as well that oculusrealxxxx site you mentioned, while they did get that dreaded letter of cease and desist, their actual infringement was not the name (by itself) as you might have guessed and they do not spell that out on purpose in that letter. Had they not also included the trademark image of oculus, they might have got away with it. The image mark was a clear indication of whose mark they were confusing it with/infringing on as they are plenty of oculus marks in the tm library and none of them are products or services of adult video.
That is not to say it was not a stupid move all by itself.
In saying all of that for a more clear understanding, it's going to be funny to watch as challenges are made to the mark over the next 10 years. Yea, I see it as a never ending battle for them.
So, as I mentioned, you will see new marks for products or services as 'meta xxxx' for meta by itself is not highly protectable as a stand alone. It actually opens a lot of opportunity for future names of pre-existing domains of metaxxxxx, and there are a lot of them dating back more than 10 years. Perhaps even the majority of them are older than 10 years as difficult as that may be to believe.
I see a investor play for those pre-existing domains of likely products or services of those older metaxxxxx domains. But I would be sitting this one out because in my heart of heats, I believe that buying one now may come to a clause of 'intent' after these issues have cycled many times.
Great for the original reg if they hold'm. So, my advice is simply to watch your intent, more specifically how you promote a sale of any of these type domains. But I could buy if my intent was to short term flip. There are many opportunities in the market right now while everyone if focused on the shinny object.
We shall see.
While the term meta is hot right now, it makes a good opportunity to sell as things will relax after the hype is over and the old terms we have been celebrating will come back into focus.
And to help you properly focus, just ask yourself despite all the the recent sales, how many of these names of those sales are in actual use/ in the hands of a end-user. Investor 'perceived value' is a very volatile thing.
So, IMHO, if you are holding any, if you don't want to hold long, now is the time to sell or else wait it out.
Investors are knee jerk reactionary and everything is not clear as a bell just yet.
This is a long game and only getting started. We may yet see some new terms create similar effects in the market, but it still does not change the fundamentals. It's just a expansion of them.