Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On 5 February 2010 15:19, Elizabeth Mattijsen l...@dijkmat.nl wrote: If it would be a co.uk domain, she could probably go to a UK court. Since this is a .com domain, I think any UK judge will quickly dismiss on the grounds that it is an American domain, so that she should go to court in the U.S. of A. And *that* will prove to become very costly very quickly indeed. no .co.us would be an american domain, .com is a global TLD, so it's anybodies. OTOH, national businesses using an global TLD is hateful. A. -- Aaron J Trevena, BSc Hons http://www.aarontrevena.co.uk LAMP System Integration, Development and Consulting
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 15:46, Aaron Trevena aaron.trev...@gmail.com wrote: no .co.us would be an american domain , specifically one for a company in Colorado. Or so it used to be; I think they've relaxed the rules on the .us domain since then. (Perhaps partly because the strict rules were, I believe, one reason why the .us TLD never really caught on.) Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton philip.new...@gmail.com
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On Tue, 2010-02-09 at 14:46 +, Aaron Trevena wrote: If it would be a co.uk domain, she could probably go to a UK court. Since this is a .com domain, I think any UK judge will quickly dismiss on the grounds that it is an American domain, so that she should go to court in the U.S. of A. And *that* will prove to become very costly very quickly indeed. no .co.us would be an american domain, .com is a global TLD, so it's anybodies. That's true but only to a limited extent as .COM domains are registered subject to the terms and conditions of the ICANN approved registries which pretty much all state that legal disputes regarding the domain registration must be settled in the courts of that registries home country or, more commonly, in the USA. Certainly a judge in an English (and Welsh) or Scots court would not refuse to hear a case arising from a dispute but if the other party responds to the case pointing out that the domain is registered subject to the laws of some other jurisdiction the judge may decide that it's appropriate to direct the plaintiff to bring the case there. That said the court is just as likely to hear the case and make an order on the basis that the order should be enforceable through the courts of the other jurisdiction. OTOH, national businesses using an global TLD is hateful. Why? The global TLDs are not reserved to multinationals. They are, rightly, first come first served subject to reasonable restrictions in law - ie trademark, etc.
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
To pick up on one point ... The weird thing though is that whois tells me that the record was created 6 years ago. That seems a long time for someone to sit on a useless domain name. I have plenty of domain names registered that I have reckoned will be great for particular projects but not got around to them yet, so they have been effectively blank domains for quite a few years, so 'useless' is in the eye of the beholder. One thing though, is 6 years ago before or after your friend started their business? and four letters may be someone's initials ... Alison
Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
Hi, I figured some of you might have some information about this: I have a friend who owns a small company. She has a web site, with the .eu suffix, but would like the .com one. That domain is owned by someone in the UK, who is not using it (its parked on a US server that seems to advertise it as for sale). They are offering to sell the domain... for several thousand pounds. Actually they first wanted to sell it for that amount, then said that someone else was interested in buying it and that even at that price they could not sell it. My friend owns the trademark for the name in Europe, the US and Asia. It is a very distinct name and a Google search on the name returns only hits related to her product. So it looks like a clear case of cyber-squatting to me. I am not sure what she can do about it though. It seems like the only solution is to go to court, and there have been very few cases that went to trial. Does anyone have a suggestion on the course of action that might best get results? I fully understand that not everyone here is a lawyer (and the ones who are probably wouldn't admit it ;--), but maybe someone has been in that situation before. Thanks -- mirod
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On 5 February 2010 13:29, mirod mi...@xmltwig.com wrote: I am not sure what she can do about it though. It seems like the only solution is to go to court, and there have been very few cases that went to trial. Does anyone have a suggestion on the course of action that might best get results? I fully understand that not everyone here is a lawyer (and the ones who are probably wouldn't admit it ;--), but maybe someone has been in that situation before. I work for a domain registry. Our default policy on this sort of thing is to encourage the two parties involved to resolve the dispute themselves. If they can't do this, they're free to and fight at WIPO - who are very very slow to do anything. -- Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt. -- Abraham Lincoln
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
* Dominic Thoreau (domi...@thoreau-online.net) [100205 13:46]: On 5 February 2010 13:29, mirod mi...@xmltwig.com wrote: I am not sure what she can do about it though. It seems like the only solution is to go to court, and there have been very few cases that went to trial. Our default policy on this sort of thing is to encourage the two parties involved to resolve the dispute themselves. If they can't do this, they're free to and fight at WIPO - who are very very slow to do anything. Same for the Dutch TLD (.nl) : they refuse to play a role in these disputes and leave it to lawsuits... where it ends-up quite often, afaik. Difficult when the hijacker of the domain and the owner of the trademark live in different countries. -- Regards, MarkOv Mark Overmeer MScMARKOV Solutions m...@overmeer.net soluti...@overmeer.net http://Mark.Overmeer.net http://solutions.overmeer.net
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 14:29 +0100, mirod wrote: My friend owns the trademark for the name in Europe, the US and Asia. It is a very distinct name and a Google search on the name returns only hits related to her product. So it looks like a clear case of cyber-squatting to me. It might be. It depends upon whether the domain name was registered in bad faith (see http://www.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp-policy-24oct99.htm for details) or not. Do bear in mind that Trademark protects a name in relation to a specific market segment and is not universal so if the current registrant was using the name in connection with some other market segment or not commercially and specifically in a manner not likely to cause confusion as to who was using it your friend might not have a right to try and take the domain via a DRP. I am not sure what she can do about it though. It seems like the only solution is to go to court, and there have been very few cases that went to trial. Perhaps the registry operator the domain was registered through (as shown in the whois record) operates a dispute resolution service although many of them effectively don't. WIPO is an option for a dispute on a .com domain but it will be expensive and slow. It's really designed to accommodate the needs and desires of larger companies. If the person who has registered the domain is based in the UK taking them to court over the matter should not be too hard. If they are elsewhere you might well have to bring action in a US court which will be expensive.
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
Dominic Thoreau wrote: On 5 February 2010 13:29, mirod mi...@xmltwig.com wrote: I am not sure what she can do about it though. It seems like the only solution is to go to court, and there have been very few cases that went to trial. Does anyone have a suggestion on the course of action that might best get results? I fully understand that not everyone here is a lawyer (and the ones who are probably wouldn't admit it ;--), but maybe someone has been in that situation before. I work for a domain registry. Our default policy on this sort of thing is to encourage the two parties involved to resolve the dispute themselves. If they can't do this, they're free to and fight at WIPO - who are very very slow to do anything. The problem in this case is that there is really no incentive for the other party do do much, beyond lowering their price to try to get some money instead of getting nothing. It's not like that domain would be of use to any one except my friend. Oddly enough though, the price they are asking seems to be more than the cost of filing a complaint at WIPO. -- mirod
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On Feb 5, 2010, at 2:29 PM, mirod wrote: I figured some of you might have some information about this: I have a friend who owns a small company. She has a web site, with the .eu suffix, but would like the .com one. That domain is owned by someone in the UK, who is not using it (its parked on a US server that seems to advertise it as for sale). They are offering to sell the domain... for several thousand pounds. Actually they first wanted to sell it for that amount, then said that someone else was interested in buying it and that even at that price they could not sell it. My friend owns the trademark for the name in Europe, the US and Asia. It is a very distinct name and a Google search on the name returns only hits related to her product. So it looks like a clear case of cyber-squatting to me. I am not sure what she can do about it though. It seems like the only solution is to go to court, and there have been very few cases that went to trial. Does anyone have a suggestion on the course of action that might best get results? I fully understand that not everyone here is a lawyer (and the ones who are probably wouldn't admit it ;--), but maybe someone has been in that situation before. Considering the price of lawyers, the personal anguish, aggravation and duration of having to go to court, I would go for purchasing the domain if she really needs it that badly. This goes against anybody's feeling of justice, but you really have to ask yourself if it is worth the it. Yes, there is no justice in this world unless you are willing to put up the money (whether that is cash, or the time you need to spent on it that you could have used in any other, more fruitful manner). Liz
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On 5 February 2010 14:28, Elizabeth Mattijsen l...@dijkmat.nl wrote: On Feb 5, 2010, at 2:29 PM, mirod wrote: I figured some of you might have some information about this: I have a friend who owns a small company. She has a web site, with the .eu suffix, but would like the .com one. That domain is owned by someone in the UK, who is not using it (its parked on a US server that seems to advertise it as for sale). They are offering to sell the domain... for several thousand pounds. Actually they first wanted to sell it for that amount, then said that someone else was interested in buying it and that even at that price they could not sell it. My friend owns the trademark for the name in Europe, the US and Asia. It is a very distinct name and a Google search on the name returns only hits related to her product. So it looks like a clear case of cyber-squatting to me. I am not sure what she can do about it though. It seems like the only solution is to go to court, and there have been very few cases that went to trial. Does anyone have a suggestion on the course of action that might best get results? I fully understand that not everyone here is a lawyer (and the ones who are probably wouldn't admit it ;--), but maybe someone has been in that situation before. I tend to agree, court proceeding are hellish and costly. However legal costs are usually picked up by the loser in the case. The alleged squatter will probably be aware of this. It might be worth your friend spending an hour with a lawyer that specialises in domain disputes. If the lawyer is persuaded that the case is clear cut, an initial letter to the opposite side might make them more flexible. Dp.
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
Jason Clifford wrote: On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 14:29 +0100, mirod wrote: My friend owns the trademark for the name in Europe, the US and Asia. It is a very distinct name and a Google search on the name returns only hits related to her product. So it looks like a clear case of cyber-squatting to me. It might be. It depends upon whether the domain name was registered in bad faith (see http://www.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp-policy-24oct99.htm for details) or not. Do bear in mind that Trademark protects a name in relation to a specific market segment and is not universal so if the current registrant was using the name in connection with some other market segment or not commercially and specifically in a manner not likely to cause confusion as to who was using it your friend might not have a right to try and take the domain via a DRP. It appears that her brand is unique, which is lucky for a 4 letter word! The weird thing though is that whois tells me that the record was created 6 years ago. That seems a long time for someone to sit on a useless domain name. I am not sure what she can do about it though. It seems like the only solution is to go to court, and there have been very few cases that went to trial. Perhaps the registry operator the domain was registered through (as shown in the whois record) operates a dispute resolution service although many of them effectively don't. WIPO is an option for a dispute on a .com domain but it will be expensive and slow. It's really designed to accommodate the needs and desires of larger companies. If the person who has registered the domain is based in the UK taking them to court over the matter should not be too hard. If they are elsewhere you might well have to bring action in a US court which will be expensive. The registrar is moniker.com. From a quick look at their website, they seem to be very much in the business of providing a market place for domain names. And their dispute policy, although quite long, seems to boil down to require the involvement of WIPO :--( The registrant is based in the UK, but my friend is in Italy. -- mirod
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote: Considering the price of lawyers, the personal anguish, aggravation and duration of having to go to court, I would go for purchasing the domain if she really needs it that badly. This goes against anybody's feeling of justice, but you really have to ask yourself if it is worth the it. I'll probably tell her to offer 500 pounds for it, and if they don't sell at that price to just use a different domain. It's funny how people in different businesses react though, she designs jewelry, and she really, really, hates trademark infringements. Mostly because there is usually not much she can do, what with being small and all. Thanks -- mirod
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On Feb 5, 2010, at 4:05 PM, mirod wrote: Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote: Considering the price of lawyers, the personal anguish, aggravation and duration of having to go to court, I would go for purchasing the domain if she really needs it that badly. This goes against anybody's feeling of justice, but you really have to ask yourself if it is worth the it. I'll probably tell her to offer 500 pounds for it, and if they don't sell at that price to just use a different domain. It's funny how people in different businesses react though, she designs jewelry, and she really, really, hates trademark infringements. Mostly because there is usually not much she can do, what with being small and all. If it would be a co.uk domain, she could probably go to a UK court. Since this is a .com domain, I think any UK judge will quickly dismiss on the grounds that it is an American domain, so that she should go to court in the U.S. of A. And *that* will prove to become very costly very quickly indeed. Liz
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On Fri, 5 Feb 2010, mirod wrote: It appears that her brand is unique, which is lucky for a 4 letter word! In which case, ignore all previous comments on trademark, lawyers and apparent cost. It has a high inherent value just as it is, and a lot of people will pay a few thousand pounds just to add it to their portfolio, and more if they have a handy use for it. If your friend wants any 4-letter domain, she's going to have to spend a lot of cash. the hatter
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On 5/2/10 15:05, mirod wrote: I'll probably tell her to offer 500 pounds for it, and if they don't sell at that price to just use a different domain. Be careful with that approach. If you believe that they have no claim on the domain, offering money for it gives them a defence and weakens your claim for infringement. Having been through this process myself, I think your best route since the registrant is based in the UK is: 1. Send a solicitors letter to the registrant claiming infringement and requesting transfer within 30 days. 2. If that doesn't work, you can either lodge a complaint with WIPO and wait, or give up and not worry about it. If they make an offer, you can decide whether to accept it or not and that comes back to what it's worth to your friend. S.
Re: Fun Friday afternoon topic: domain name disputes
On Friday 05 February 2010, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote: If it would be a co.uk domain, she could probably go to a UK court. Nominet has a dispute service. See, eg, http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/DRS/ . Since this is a .com domain, I think any UK judge will quickly dismiss on the grounds that it is an American domain, so that she should go to court in the U.S. of A. And *that* will prove to become very costly very quickly indeed. Agreed. Roger
