Welcome to Welcome to DNF.com™ - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars

If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the largest domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 105,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.

Register Today on DNForum IT'S FREE!

Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Platinum Lifetime Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,140
    DNF$
    3,150
    Bank
    0
    Total DNF$
    3,150
    Donate  

    The Case Of The Defunct Domain Name Service Provider

    The Case Of The Defunct Domain Name Service Provider
    from Schwimmerlegal.com

    Ottomanelli Brothers hired a web design company. An employee of the company registered the domain name NYCOTTO.COM in his own names for unknown reasons. The design company provided DNS servers. It went out of business and the site went dead. The employee was nowhere to be found. No one could re-point the name without the authorization of the missing employee. So Ottomanelli brought a UDRP in order to get control of its domain name (and re-surrect its site).

    Ottomanelli Bros. v. Rob Velez, NAF FA0503000440427 (May 2, 2005).

    Reference:
    http://www.arb-forum.com/domains/decisions/440427.htm

    Draqons comments:

    Well I have no reason to upset that the complainant won this UDRP, they had the only legitimate claim to the domain and the current registrant was nowhere to be found.

    That said:

    The panelist wrote the following: "Respondent’s nycotto.com domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s OTTOMANELLI mark. Respondent’s domain name incorporates the dominant feature of Complainant’s mark, “otto,” and adds the geographic term “nyc” which refers to New York City, where Complainant operates."

    Perhaps I am mistaken, but is this panelist smoking liquid crack or what? How can "NycOtto" be seen as as infringing upon the mark "Ottomanelli"? I dont think the word "otto" can possibly be seen as the dominant part of the mark Ottomanelli, the entire word Ottomanelli is distinctive and irreducible.

    Oh and not to mention there is something unwholesome about using the UDRP in such a manner, when its clear the domain wasnt registered in bad faith. Its a violatoin of the UDRPs underlying tenets...but i thought that was obvious so im not posting more than tthis paragraph about it.
    Last edited by draqon; 05-14-2005 at 02:00 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

  2. #2
    Domain Buyer
    DaddyHalbucks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Las Vegas, USA
    Posts
    3,211
    Country

    United States
    DNF$
    115,488
    Bank
    0
    Total DNF$
    115,488
    Donate  

    Re: The Case Of The Defunct Domain Name Service Provider

    Quote Originally Posted by draqon
    Perhaps I am mistaken, but is this panelist smoking liquid crack or what? How can "NycOtto" be seen as as infringing upon the mark "Ottomanelli"? I dont think the word "otto" can possibly be seen as the dominant part of the mark Ottomanelli, the entire word Ottomanelli is distinctive and irreducible.

    Oh and not to mention there is something unwholesome about using the UDRP in such a manner, when its clear the domain wasnt registered in bad faith.
    Exactly. This is a bizarre decision. It just shows how easily UDRPs are manipulated.

    I wonder if these shaky rulings to transfer domains for complainants are sometimes a substitute for panelists who didn't get breast fed from their mothers, or didn't get hugged enough as children, or don't get laid enough now.

    The UDRP was supposed to address only the most egregious cases of cybersquatting on famous, distinctive, and registered trademarks that were clearly registered and being used in bad faith.

    Now, the UDRP is just a common whore with no morals, a catchall for problems, a cheap alternative to litigation, and a hedge for disgruntled and incompetent intellectual property managers.

    The UDRP has become a joke!

  3. #3
    Platinum Lifetime Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Manila
    Posts
    1,721
    DNF$
    7,964
    Bank
    0
    Total DNF$
    7,964
    Donate  

    Re: The Case Of The Defunct Domain Name Service Provider

    Reminds me of the 2 or so UDRPs where it was used to recover stolen domain
    names. Both that and this were basically used for the same reason: there isn't
    any other way to legitimately get the names back without going thru court.

    And because the respondent didn't reply, what choice did the panelist have?
    Vidi, Vici, Veni!

  4. #4
    DNF Addict

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Neither here no
    Posts
    3,443
    Country

    United States
    DNF$
    5,261
    Bank
    0
    Total DNF$
    5,261
    Donate  

    Re: The Case Of The Defunct Domain Name Service Provider

    Mabey by making a default judgement because the respodent didn't dispute instead of putting down the same BS wording they use on every decision?

  5. #5
    Domain Buyer
    DaddyHalbucks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Las Vegas, USA
    Posts
    3,211
    Country

    United States
    DNF$
    115,488
    Bank
    0
    Total DNF$
    115,488
    Donate  

    Re: The Case Of The Defunct Domain Name Service Provider

    Quote Originally Posted by davezan1
    Reminds me of the 2 or so UDRPs where it was used to recover stolen domain
    names. Both that and this were basically used for the same reason: there isn't
    any other way to legitimately get the names back without going thru court.

    And because the respondent didn't reply, what choice did the panelist have?

    But, the UDRP was never intended as a replacement for court. The rules of evidence are not the same, and the panel cannot give injunctive relief, nor issue subpoenas, etc..

    The panelist had alot of choice! The panelist could have strictly followed the rules instead of grabbing extra power and wrongly/ unfairly/ unilaterally expanding the role of the UDRP.

    :(

  6. #6
    Bloody Hell
    Acro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    28,668
    Country

    Holy See
    DNF$
    15,572
    Bank
    0
    Total DNF$
    15,572
    Donate  

    Re: The Case Of The Defunct Domain Name Service Provider

    I think Otto from NYC has some connections to the mob? :-D

    I'm gunna make ya an offa.

    DomainGang.com - Digital Entertainment for Domainers
    Acroplex - Web & Graphics
    Acro.net - My Blog

  7. #7
    Platinum Lifetime Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Manila
    Posts
    1,721
    DNF$
    7,964
    Bank
    0
    Total DNF$
    7,964
    Donate  

    Re: The Case Of The Defunct Domain Name Service Provider

    Quote Originally Posted by RADiSTAR
    II'm gunna make ya an offa.
    ...you can't refuse.
    Vidi, Vici, Veni!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Domain name forum recommended by Domaining.com