We consider the current landscape of intellectual property surrounding 007, to gain an overview of what the current and future custodians of the brand may need to contend with.

The worst-kept-secret member of the British Secret Service has been in the news a number of times in significant weeks. Following from ongoing speculation about the identity of the next actor to take on the role of Bond¹, a number of stories about the creative control of the film franchise have emerged. One of the most significant revelations is the news that the Broccoli/Wilson family – owners of EON Productions Limited and Danjaq in the US², and long-time controllers of brand Bond – will be ceding control to Amazon MGM Studios in a reported $1 billion deal^3,4,5,6,7.

An additional complication is that fact that the copyright protection for the original James Bond novels is set to expire in 2035, allowing some elements of the IP to fall into the public domain and potentially providing an opening for creations by rival studios⁸ and, potentially, additional licensing opportunities⁹.

Furthermore, a case has also recently been filed by Dubai-based property developer Josef Kleindienst for the cancellation of various Bond-related trademarks in the EU and UK, on the grounds of non-use¹⁰.

With these developments in mind, it seems an appropriate time to consider the current landscape of intellectual property surrounding 007, to gain an overview of what the current and future custodians of the brand may need to contend with. In particular, there may be a risk that James Bond may be (or may become) subject to some element of genericism, as an overall descriptor of an action-hero spy character.

The James Bond domain name landscape

As in numerous previous studies, the domain name dataset is a good place from which to gain initial insights, as a proxy of the overall IP landscape. As of 01-Mar-2025, there are 746 registered gTLD¹¹ domains with names containing ‘james(-)bond’, ‘bond*007’ or ‘007*bond’¹² (collectively, ‘James Bond domains’), according to zone-file analysis, of which at least (only) 37 appear to be under official ownership (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Numbers of third-party James Bond gTLD domains, by month of registration (where available) (Jan-1996 to Feb-2025)

425 of the 709 third-party domain names produce some sort of live website response, of which 230 have a ‘non-zero’ webpage title.

Aside from the group of essentially ‘dormant’ sites, such as those displaying holding or parking pages, and pages offering the domain names for sale, the dataset unsurprisingly also includes groups of informational or fan sites, and other instances of websites which may pertain to legitimate use of the same (‘James Bond’) name (‘James Bond Furniture’, ‘James Bond Dental’, ‘James Bond Logistics’, ‘James Bond Carpet Cleaning’, etc.).

Beyond this, there are a number of additional websites featuring use of the ‘007’ ‘tag’ in conjunction with what appear to be otherwise unrelated ‘Bond’ references, as an apparent means of providing an additional marketing ‘hook’ (e.g. Megan Bond beauty products (SLD¹³: meganbond007), Bond Flooring (SLD: bondfl007ing), ‘Bond 007 Heating and Cooling’ (SLD: bond007heatingandcooling), bond provider Worldwide Insurance Specialists, Inc. (SLD: bond007), etc.) – an illustration of the extent of renown of the 007 / Bond name and brand.

However, there are also a number of instances of more explicit, potentially unauthorised use of official IP, of which some examples are shown in Figure 2.

Conclusion

The analysis shows that there already exists a wide range of potential infringements relating to James Bond, comprising a universe which may be set to grow, following the high-profile news stories of the changes of IP ownership, continuing interest in the franchise, and the massive potential growth in spin-offs and licensing opportunities as the IP landscape continues to evolve over the coming years.

As for other popular brands, the IP owners would be wise to monitor the landscape as part of a holistic brand protection initiative, covering the compilation and consolidation of an appropriate domain portfolio (including defensive registrations), securing of appropriate IP protection in relevant product classes and jurisdictions, and a comprehensive programme of monitoring, analysis and enforcement.

Or, we could say…

The spectre of a brand-protection thunderball of problems might scare the living daylights out of the brand owners of the spy who loved me. As the portfolio is transferred from one group to another, we may find that you only live twice to see a requirement for appropriate measures to be put in place.

If you’re charged with management of a brand, a key component is the use of a monitoring service to keep a golden-eye on the landscape, providing an overview of infringements for your eyes only. A comprehensive portfolio of IP protection essentially provides you with a licence to kill any such infringements. Following a process of analysis and prioritisation, it is then advisable to consider next steps. Some findings are best left to live and let die, whilst you may take a view to a kill for other more concerning examples. The most problematic infringing sites are those which have no time to die – e.g. those originating from high-risk or low compliance jurisdictions, such as those coming from Russia with love – so it may be prudent to consider escalation measures, in the hope that the infringements die another day, though there may be little more than a quantum of solace in cases where the sites refuse to sky-fall.

Finally, in brand protection, one must also consider that the world is not enough, and that (Dr) no set of measures may be too much – the landscape is continually evolving, so it is always important to be forward thinking, in acceptance of the fact that tomorrow never dies.