| 12:57 am on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
is this squatter from the bahamas or cayman islands?
| 1:50 am on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Belize but your close enough!
| 2:14 am on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|WIPO should be able to impose massive fines against them where the ruling goes against them. |
If WIPO is able to collect monetary damages from the respondent, it's also fair the respondent gets to collect such from complainants who file potentially frivolous disputes and eventually lose them.
Besides, WIPO has no mechanism to get such from people in countries who otherwise don't recognize their authority.
| 11:27 pm on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|If WIPO is able to collect monetary damages from the respondent, it's also fair the respondent gets to collect such from complainants who file potentially frivolous disputes and eventually lose them. |
I would agree with you but the fact is that the majority of these cases are against chancers that sit on domains in the hope of making a few quid out of them.
Look, the way i see it is that if you get a domain like this-domain-name-isgreat.com for a couple of dollars and you spotted it first and someone wants it and will offer you $1 million then thats your good fortune.
What i dont like is chancers registering domains that they know relate to a company names to get type in traffic and the official company has to pay $2000 USD via WIPO and a long drawn out battle to get it back off them. They know the domains relate to a company - they actively look for them!
In the case ive outlined above the company makes a business out of doing this - shut them down i say, its not helping the developing internet is it?
| 2:55 am on Nov 24, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|a) their Ltd company name is the same as the domain b) its a registered trademark c) they own the .co.uk domain version and d) they are established and known in the market as the name. So its a no brainer. |
And yet they've just now realized that someone else owns the .com? Is there a "no brainer" running the company or in charge of web marketing? :)
| 12:45 am on Nov 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
So in your view then it should be a total free for all and if i registered say pepsicola.com before they did then thats my good fortune and they should pay me for it?
Its like a form of blackmail imo - This is where i think the internet needs tightening up further. At least WIPO offers some recourse, but i still think that you should be able to claim for your costs back.
A blue chip company should not have to "Worry" that some chancer has registered their company name before they did.
Im not talking here about generic names, im talking about company names that mean nothing to anyone on the internet other than the company they belong to, ie a brand name.
Dont you think webmasters should have a moral obligation to act in the right way?.
| 12:16 pm on Nov 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
The problem is it isnít always so black and white
There are cases where large organizations use both trademarks with UDRP and the courts for overreaching.
Mr Nissan received a lot of hassle over his name Nissan.com from the Nissan Motorís Corporation for example.
Take a (fictitious) pure generic like Apple Ė Should Apple Computers be able to take apple.com and get costs too? Or should they have to buy it from the existing registrant? What about it the registrant was the Beetle's Apple Corp. Limited (Music)
Slightly more confusing is Perfume Bay.com should ebay be entitled to perfumebay.com? Which Mark takes precedence Perfume Bay TM or Ebay TM? [ca9.uscourts.gov...]
A powerful brand like Nike is very well protected. And even Nike isnít a made up word in the Greek mythology she was the Goddess of Victory.
So should costs get awarded at UDRP?
In the end UDRP is about resolving a dispute quickly and cheaply. A complainant can always go straight to court without using UDRP (as Microsoft is currently doing) if they wish to punish a registrant for pecuniary damages.
Sure UDRP has its failings, one of the worst is where a single panellist is allowed to let his own personal views cloud the decision making process and his decisions get skewed accordingly.
| 11:24 pm on Nov 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Not saying that at all RichTC, just commenting that in the real world it's often best to get in touch with reality as soon as possible :)