Its official, UDRP is BS! Unless you are a millionaire... - DNForum - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars

**john211** · 08-05-2006, 07:16 PM

You should NOT be in the domain buying/selling industry, or buy domains for investments. Any idiot could file a case at WIPO and another idiot at the panel will grant it to him! So unless you are a millionaire with tons of cash to fight it court, you could lose ANY domain for ANY reason.

How can anyone prove bad faith?! I'll tell you how! If you are using a domain(park or whatever) about a legit company and make money from their reputation! But search and browse long enough in the wipo cases, and in tons of cases this thing didn't happen, and the UDRP transfered it. If you are not using your domain right now, they will say that you have no interest(even if you tell them that you plan on developping later), and will AUTOMATICALLY assume bad faith! Go and browse in the cases for 10 minutes, 95% of all cases are won by the complainant! Talk about having odds against you if you get a letter of UDRP!

But thats not what drives me nuts! I'll tell you what it is. If you buy a domain for 10k, then someone sues and win, you give it to them for FREE!! Thats right, they don't have to pay for shit! And if you plan to selling it to them for even 500$, you are guaranteed to lose your case as it is considered bad faith. Anyone wanna discuss bout UDRP and this BS organization?

If you ask me, the only things that have to be transfered are when the COMPLETE name is trademarked and is "domained". The case The Knot won Knot.com! WTF! A dictionary word. MBF.com, not trademarked, should not of gone to Mercedes. Tiger.com, Lassie.com, all of them are common words or names that can be used by anyone! Should not be transfered. If they want them, they have to pay like anyone else.

And this is why WIPO would transfer the domain to the complainant in most cases! If you want to file a suit, you have to pay something like $2000! When everyone who sues sees that they can get any domain they want by filing a case and giving $2000, then WIPO makes money! If most of the cases we're not granted or won, it would become obvious to anyone(as it is obvious now that they transfer most of the time) and no one would waste their money filing a case and WIPO wouldn't make a penny!

**Leading Names** · 08-05-2006, 08:35 PM

I think your post reflects my feelings over the past few months, it's getting beyond a joke. I'm not against UDRP, I just think it needs policy needs to be radically overhauled.

I'd like to see...

1. Three person panels made compulsory – so in each case you get a debate, not just an opinion.

2. The UDRP handled by ICANN directly, not "outsourced"to legal/TM companies. Competition between companies when it comes to UDRP is a very bad thing, as complainants just choose the company that most often sides with the complainant – hence why WIPO get the lion's share of cases. This encourages them to continue to decide in favour of the complainant.

3. 2/3 letter names and correctly spelled dictionary (one word) domains excluded from the "identical or confusingly similar" part of the policy. If a company chooses to brand around one-word dictionary domains or two/three letter domains they shouldn't expect to have exclusive rights to those terms/acronyms/abbreviations.

There are tons more, I'll add more when I get around to it

- Rob

**john211** · 08-05-2006, 09:12 PM

Yea, whats that shit, Identical or confusingly similar?? Its simple OK, it should be , is it the SAME? yes|no. Who cares about confusing? People have brains, let them judge. If lassie can be confused with a dog, the person coming at that site can judge in a second if that site talks about dogs or not. If the creator of the show doesnt like it, tough luck, he shouldve registered it before, or pay it now. You are right, there are tons of ridiculous crap that needs to be fixed big time.
Man Im telling you, if I was a member of that panel, things would be so much simpler. I'd resolve hundreds of cases a day with no problem, and wouldnt mind doing it for free.

**March2005** · 08-05-2006, 11:06 PM

Yes, the mbf.com decision did not make much sense to me
http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/deci...2006-0450.html
Search mbf on Google and look for Mercedes. It comes up as result number 311.

Banned: WhoDatDog · 08-06-2006, 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by john211

Yea, whats that shit, Identical or confusingly similar?? Its simple OK, it should be , is it the SAME? yes|no. Who cares about confusing? People have brains, let them judge. If lassie can be confused with a dog, the person coming at that site can judge in a second if that site talks about dogs or not. If the creator of the show doesnt like it, tough luck, he shouldve registered it before, or pay it now. You are right, there are tons of ridiculous crap that needs to be fixed big time.
Man Im telling you, if I was a member of that panel, things would be so much simpler. I'd resolve hundreds of cases a day with no problem, and wouldnt mind doing it for free.

There have been some recent examples of some very poor decisions. For the most part though, most of the cases usually come down to common sense, and the decisions have generally reflected that.

Remember, we are still in the first inning of the Internet, and it is the Wild Wild West. If there is one saving grace for having poor decisions it is that this might keep the price down on some risky names...that's good if you are a buyer.

Also, many Respondents hurt themselves by having poorly reasoned arguments and insincere statements (or not responding at all). A well-reasoned and well thought-out response can be achieved with or without an attorney, and there are certainly enough cases that have gone both ways for each side to have examples of similar cases decided in their favor.

I will agree that Bad Faith is often assumed without any evidence. The decision-makers can pretty much get to where they want to go...one way or the other.

Mr. Deleted · 08-06-2006, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leading Names

I think your post reflects my feelings over the past few months, it's getting beyond a joke. I'm not against UDRP, I just think it needs policy needs to be radically overhauled.

I'd like to see...

1. Three person panels made compulsory – so in each case you get a debate, not just an opinion.

2. The UDRP handled by ICANN directly, not "outsourced"to legal/TM companies. Competition between companies when it comes to UDRP is a very bad thing, as complainants just choose the company that most often sides with the complainant – hence why WIPO get the lion's share of cases. This encourages them to continue to decide in favour of the complainant.

3. 2/3 letter names and correctly spelled dictionary (one word) domains excluded from the "identical or confusingly similar" part of the policy. If a company chooses to brand around one-word dictionary domains or two/three letter domains they shouldn't expect to have exclusive rights to those terms/acronyms/abbreviations.

There are tons more, I'll add more when I get around to it

- Rob

http://www.dnforum.com/showthread.ph...440#post907440

In this thread, I asked why can they even wipo anything under 4 letters, I think all the big companies that are going to have a major TM on 3 letter names, already have them names, so the rest should be excluded from wipos from now on.

**SYSTEMX** · 08-07-2006, 02:44 AM

Yeah, why don't anybody hire us at WIPO never? Huh

I think some of us should be included in various WIPO panels and also decide who gets what. We are making this business a business anyway!!!

**Bountyhunter** · 08-08-2006, 02:37 AM

My take on this is....Dont ever throw out large numbers (or any offer for that matter) first when confronted with an offer, make a landing page that has nothing do with any potential complaintant...you know like mbf= Mega Butt Females or some jokers intials..Mike Buford Fandango complete with bio...probably didnt help that the respondant filed his response in Korean. You all have been warned....if wipo even suspects your being underhanded (like owning other TM domains) ..your going to lose.

**Ian** · 08-08-2006, 02:59 AM

The MBF v Daimler Chrysler case was decided very poorly. It gives the impression that this WIPO should never be trusted. I think the common law rights pose one of the biggest escape strategies for WIPO to collude with big companies and bully domainers or small businesses. But if I was the owner of MBF I would have just taken the initial offer by Mercedes because anyway they were going to win the case.
just my 2 euro cents

**DNQuest.com** · 08-08-2006, 12:26 PM

Well, we all know the reality of the domain game, if you don't have the heart and don't do your reaearch to protect yourself, then get out of the game. I do agree with most of the decisions that are rendered, but I will admit some have me scratching my head. But the truth is, that IS the process in place, you don't like it, get out now.