Profit to be made from Trademark Domain Names?

[scjollie]

Profit to be made from Trademark Domain Names?
Insider Secret's or better safe than sorry?

Ok. I'm a rookie.
I've been selling domain names for 3 days. I had my first sell of $700 yesterday. I want to thank everyone here on DNForum.com for all your help. I am learning alot from you guys. I actually bought about 15 names 3 years ago, intending to sell them but just never did, I did attemp to sell a few on ebay several times, but not one bid and I am glad because I would've sold them to cheap.

OK, to the question at hand.....

All this stuff about getting names of industry giants and trademark Infringement...
I have seen some pretty big names on here and you guys disreguard them immediately...saying they're worth nothing...but a law suite..... for trademark infringement.

Well, doesn't it take alot of money for them to go to ICANN's Dispute board and have this disput resovled? Wouldn't they rather just buy the name from you for say $1000. just to resolve it and have the name themselves? I mean..if its that good a name to scare people off because they will be sued..that tells me its a good name.

I was on ICANN reading through the site about TradeMark disputes.
If I read right, they (Plantiff) would have to fork out a minimum $950.00 and up to $6,000 for multiple domains, just to file a complaint against you with ICANN's approved UDRP boards and another $1000-$5000 for their laywers to handle it.
Even if they win the action against you, you are not responsable for the winners fees if you lose, At most you would pay 50% meaning half the fees UDRP charges, meaning they have to pay the other 50% of the UDRP fees at least even if they win.
(the plantiff pays 100% of fees upfront, if you lose you re-imburse 50% of that to the plantiff) ...and they know this too.

What I'm getting at here is...
The key being that you let them know you have the name and its up for sale, that someone else may buy the domain name and what they do with it is out of your control, let them know their best bet is to buy the domain name now and they are protecting themselves from legal fee's and ect (even if they win) in the future.
If the name is that good, they'll most likely make you an offer once approached and buy the domain name from you with a decent profit for you, just to resolve it and use it themselves.
If it is that good of a name I'm sure it will bring them hits and pay off for them anyway.
Of course this is risky because you could get stuck with it, unless you just buy the premo names. Then again there seems to be plenty of people buying names like Goodyear.com thinking they're going to get millions for it.
Maybe the best bet is selling them to unknowing buyers?
You might not get rich buying these but could it be profitable, or not worth the trouble? Whadya think?

I looked on ICANN for a UDRP fee schedule but couldn't find one updated more recently.
This is the most up to date schedule I could find off a lawyers site.
If you find a updated one, please post it, and any advice you pro's have.
Just thought I'd get your opinions on this.

See the UDRP's fee schedule and rules (may 2001) at the link below.

http://www.keytlaw.com/urls/udrpfees.htm



A domain name is a tool, lets use them
to our advantage, just as they do.

There is a rock and a hard place and its up to us to
find it and not get crushed, but still make a profit.

Still Learning Guys,
scjollie

[DomainGoon]

Depending on where you are located, ICANN could be the least of your problems. Some countries, like the U.S., have laws that allow trademark owners to sue you for hundreds of thousands of dollars if you try to sell them a typo of their trademark.

Also, most companies won't pay you a penny because then they would be encouraging other people to do the exact same thing you did. They want to discourage that behavior by suing you, not encourage it by paying you.

Some people make money robbing banks, does that mean you should take the chance and do it too? No.

[Zoobar]

Originally posted by scjollie
Wouldn't they rather just buy the name from you for say $1000. just to resolve it and have the name themselves?

Corporations are broken down by departments and budgets which are pre-approved each fiscal year. Hell of a lot easier in the corporate structure to push it to the legal dept. to resolve.

for less $1000.00
most company would just pay get back name

[GeorgeK]

Not necessarily. A lot of companies will file UDRP to set a public example, that they don't give in to domain terrorists. Once you begin to be known as a company that will pay the blackmail, you are subject to "death by a thousand cuts", as folks will abuse it and use that firm to make money through cybersquatting.

A company like PlayBoy spends the dough at UDRP not only to get the domain back, but as a signal to future squatters that there won't be a jackpot payoff awaiting them when they register variations of their trademarks.

[uncle]

many companies won't even send you a c&d. they will go straight to udrp

[Capt. Flash]

And you guys wonder why I am suspicious of people on this forum.
Money spent on legal costs in the recovery process are 100% tax deductible. Money spent on goodwill (purchasing the name) may not be tax deductible.
Most large corporations have legal teams that are compensated by salaries, so no difference, 1 or 10 lawsuits the cost are the same, just more work for the attorneys.
However, a number of firms do not feel comfortable fighting the cybersquater and will subcontract the work out to a firm that is more domain name sophisticated. Again the tax advantages are to fight. Some firms have so much money that no matter the amount 500. or 50,000. it is RELATIVELY nothing.
These corporations do not become big and successful by giving into an extortionist demands just to save a buck in litigation.

scjollie,

GeorgeK and Stock pilot are right. Companies would far prefer to fight (regardless of costs it seems) than pay you a penny even though most of us think the common sense answer would be to just pay 1k for the name and be done with it. Not so.

[TurNIC.com]

That is a dangerous business. They just go directly to udrp and give you a rat ass. The maximum that can offer you to solve problem amicably is $250. Go to national arbitration forum's webpage and check decisions section. If you have no legal use of disputed domain you lose and as one of the poster's said it is not just the board fee but the possible lawsuits that can really ruin you. The $700 you got does not mean that you come here and post a thread encouring people to register TM names. Regards.

for the moderators to delete this thread...
clearly an ilegal activity is being suggested...
somebody migth see this as aiding and ....
no to mention the forum reputation is a stake...
people like this give good law abiding speculators a bad reputation...

[DomeBase]

Originally posted by Don Giovanni
for the moderators to delete this thread...
clearly an ilegal activity is being suggested...
somebody migth see this as aiding and ....
no to mention the forum reputation is a stake...
people like this give good law abiding speculators a bad reputation...

With freedom comes responsibility. For my two cents, I think Don is right. We have a lot of work to do to educate the public on the difference between cybersquatting and legitimate activity in the buying, developing, and selling of domains and sites. The title of this thread could be compared to the Wall Street Journal having a column entitled -- "Making Money by Insider Trading" -- with commentary by WST columnists and financial analysts. If I were the WST, I would not run that column. Someone who does not like capitalism at all could take that out of context and say -- "Look, the Wall Street Journal supports insider trading. What a bunch of crooks." Yep -- freedom of speech is important. But maintaining freedom requires responsibility. I expect and respect those with different views on this. Just my two cents.

We all know there are many people who do this and think this is an "okay" thing to do - do we sweep it under the carpet and pretend its not there or do we argue our positions in relation to it in the open?

[Anthony Ng]

I'm really glad that the collective (or mainstream) knowledge right here at dnforum has actually gone up A LOT. Last time I mentioned something like that of GeorgeK and StockPilot (http://www.dnforum.com/showthread.php?threadid=1799), I was laughed at.

>scjollie: too long to quote ...

just don't do that. For say $1,000? Forget it. It'll ruin at least a year of your life (unless you are as big and rich and therefore powerful as the trademark owner).

>amhitvl: for less $1000.00 most company would just pay get back name

No offence, but PLEASE do not render comments in such an authoritative manner unless you can substantiate your statement with hard evidence (e.g. stats or proven experience in this area). Some people would take your post seriously and think that it's true.

>uncle: many companies won't even send you a c&d. they will go straight to udrp

You are really close My experience is: some simply go straight to the court!

For those who are interested, please see my title to the left.

Originally posted by safesys
We all know there are many people who do this and think this is an "okay" thing to do - do we sweep it under the carpet and pretend its not there or do we argue our positions in relation to it in the open?

In the open.

As for the WSJ running an article about Insider Trading...things like that are done all the time. That's how you get action to be taken.

Check out James B. Stewart's Den Of Thieves...a virtual how-to, and a classic of business literature. And one heck of a call to action.

Miles

[krisblade]

Originally posted by DomeBase


With freedom comes responsibility. For my two cents, I think Don is right. We have a lot of work to do to educate the public on the difference between cybersquatting and legitimate activity in the buying, developing, and selling of domains and sites. The title of this thread could be compared to the Wall Street Journal having a column entitled -- "Making Money by Insider Trading" -- with commentary by WST columnists and financial analysts. If I were the WST, I would not run that column. Someone who does not like capitalism at all could take that out of context and say -- "Look, the Wall Street Journal supports insider trading. What a bunch of crooks." Yep -- freedom of speech is important. But maintaining freedom requires responsibility. I expect and respect those with different views on this. Just my two cents.

You´re 100% right!!

[scjollie]

Hello Again,

If you will notice at the end of my sentance there was a question mark? Since when does that mean I'm doing it.
I never said I did this or condone it.
The domain name I sold for $700 was a legit deal, and I in no way harrased, kinived, hustled or made any kind or threating statement outright or under the suface to any company.
I emailed them, told them I had the name and I was selling it, and that I knew, or at least sometime ago they had tried to get into the Hosting business, whether or not they did or are...I don't know. I told them what I'd like to get from the name and they made one counter offer and I took it. They called me directly and the financial officer told me that they really didn't need it but would like to have for future use. No harsh words..threats or ect..an up and up deal..and honest deal...and not even related to my post, I was just congradulating myself on my first sell..HELLO!Thats that!

As for everybody trying to jump on my case, I figured I'd just get to the bottom of the controversy and see what opinions the forum members had...I wouldn't waste my time on it as I have plenty of other things to do than go looking for these names as most of them are taken by the rightful companies anyway.
I never said it was ok...and I never said it wasn't...because I'm a rookie..I don't know..I'm just trying to understand and learn about the domain business and the legal issues involved.

I guess in about 20 years all names will be trademarked.
And it sounds like even now you better trademark your domain name or somebody else could just take it from you if they do.
Is this the road we're going down?
Another way for lawyers to make a lick.
All I did was pose a question and again its taken out of context like I'm ging to run right out and do it tonight.
There are too many great names out there to hassle with this mess..as far as responsibility...I agree we all should have it and be ethical in our actions.
Just a question guys...and by the way, thanks for all your imput on it..I'm learning alot from the forum and it appears there are certian subjects that are off limits here.
I have found another site I will go to for those tough questions.
But I am here to stay, everyday.
Peace and good will to all,
scjollie

Originally posted by nameslave
I'm really glad that the collective (or mainstream) knowledge right here at dnforum has actually gone up A LOT. Last time I mentioned something like that of GeorgeK and StockPilot (http://www.dnforum.com/showthread.php?threadid=1799), I was laughed at.

>scjollie: too long to quote ...

just don't do that. For say $1,000? Forget it. It'll ruin at least a year of your life (unless you are as big and rich and therefore powerful as the trademark owner).

>amhitvl: for less $1000.00 most company would just pay get back name

No offence, but PLEASE do not render comments in such an authoritative manner unless you can substantiate your statement with hard evidence (e.g. stats or proven experience in this area). Some people would take your post seriously and think that it's true.

>uncle: many companies won't even send you a c&d. they will go straight to udrp

You are really close My experience is: some simply go straight to the court!

For those who are interested, please see my title to the left.

may be some big company able go straight to the court
but most company unable hire full times lawers
lots trade mark was register over sea
I saw google.com.cn was register by some other company at china
, and now google.com was bend by china goverment
how they going to fight trade name they own

[NameBox]

You can't seriously argue that any real business would rather save a couple of hundred dollars vs. fighting a WIPO action or filing a suing.

Dollars involed in filing a suit are trivial to most companies. Try fighting the suit and paying some lawyer a retainer, and see how far your $700 sales take you.

Given the jurisdiction, and type of entity (personal, corporation, etc.) holding the offending domain, one should be far more worried about legal proceedings than a wipo action.

GeorgeK and StockPilot have it nailed! Legal fees are no disincentive for a company seeking to make a point. In the world of finance or banking, for example, lots of cases exist where law suits are filed, and pursued at significant cost, even in the expectation that funds will never be recovered from the other party (i.e. bad debt situations, etc.).

Actively marketing a trademarked name is quasi suicidal in my opinion.