@lawyers: Is there a way to get sunrise .info names obtained using fake TMs?

[nicorlino]

Hello to all the lawyers out there,

is there a way to get sunrise .info names that were obtained using fake Trademarks by going to wipo?

Has one of you lawyers been successfull in doing this?

There are some names I would like to get this way and I thought I could hire one of you if you have successfully done this in the past.

Best Regards
Nico

[dtobias]

There was a challenge process for fake-trademark sunrise registrations, but that ended a long time ago. After that, I guess the regular UDRP is the only challenge route (well, that and a court case in some country in which you can make some claim of jurisdiction), but that generally requires that you have trademark rights to the name yourself.

[StockDoctor]

Yep Looked at that a long time ago too. Has to be the regular UDRP process and you need to have the fees (about a grand per name + atty costs) and a trademark to challenge. Requests to the registry always get the same response "We have no information about that". I tried contacting one of the BIG attorneys (you all know him) about this a year ago with money to venture, and I guess he didn't think there was a chance. Heck he didn't even return my further emails on the subject.

[nicorlino]

Thanks a lot for letting me know guys!

Best Regards
Nico

[chatcher]

Hello to all the lawyers out there,

is there a way to get sunrise .info names that were obtained using fake Trademarks by going to wipo?

Has one of you lawyers been successfull in doing this?

There are some names I would like to get this way and I thought I could hire one of you if you have successfully done this in the past.

Best Regards
Nico

I'm not a lawyer, but in my opinion sunrise .info names are now no different from any other domain name (in other words, there is no significance attached to the TM details listed in the registration). I have bought several of these names and do not expect any trouble. Most registrars will remove the TM info on request, leaving only the sunrise registration date.

[nicorlino]

I see Chuck,

thanks a lot for letting me know.

Best Regards
Nico

[StockDoctor]

I'm not a lawyer, but in my opinion sunrise .info names are now no different from any other domain name (in other words, there is no significance attached to the TM details listed in the registration). I have bought several of these names and do not expect any trouble. Most registrars will remove the TM info on request, leaving only the sunrise registration date.

The idea that these people could fraudulently take these names and then sell them when it cost a lot of us lost pre-reg fees really galls me. Changing the TM stuff may make it "look" ok but several of us have the lists of the names and won't let this go. The original sunrise reg dates don't go away, and we still have the old whois records. Nothing may come of it, but I still think these guys are liable for the money taken from us. We're talking $thousands apiece for some of us and certainly worth throwing some money at an attorney.

You're buying these names from these guys appears to condone this stuff. No concern huh? It would be alright if they got pulled back and dropped, but you're buying stolen goods.

[chatcher]

You're buying these names from these guys appears to condone this stuff. No concern huh? It would be alright if they got pulled back and dropped, but you're buying stolen goods.

I assume the TM's for the names I bought were valid. Why wouldn't I? Afilias supposedly challenged any obvious fakes. There is nothing to prevent TM owners from selling their domain names. And if they weren't valid, exactly who were the names stolen from? Who would I settle with to "clear the title"? I'm prepared to lose the names at any time, but as I said I don't expect to.

I think we would all agree that the .info rollout was "an abomination". When will it end?

[StockDoctor]

I assume the TM's for the names I bought were valid. Why wouldn't I? Afilias supposedly challenged any obvious fakes. There is nothing to prevent TM owners from selling their domain names. And if they weren't valid, exactly who were the names stolen from? Who would I settle with to "clear the title"? I'm prepared to lose the names at any time, but as I said I don't expect to.

I think we would all agree that the .info rollout was "an abomination". When will it end?

Not trying to have a battle with you, but it's pretty easy to guess which "generic" names have the fake trademarks. Also, the trademark information in the whois is usually very obvious with dates in the future or numbers that don't exist in the database. It's easy to check if you "want" to. If you're buying from legitimate TM holders there's no problem, but to "assume" everything is cool, just cause, don't smell so sweet.

Most know that Afilias never challenged all the fake TMs, but at the same time promised over and over again to do so. Maybe now is the time to put the lists of them and their non-action on the net and in the blogs when they are trying to win the .net registry management.

Afilias sucks. But then again so does ICANN. Den of whores and thieves.

[chatcher]

Not trying to have a battle with you, but it's pretty easy to guess which "generic" names have the fake trademarks. Also, the trademark information in the whois is usually very obvious with dates in the future or numbers that don't exist in the database. It's easy to check if you "want" to. If you're buying from legitimate TM holders there's no problem, but to "assume" everything is cool, just cause, don't smell so sweet.

Most know that Afilias never challenged all the fake TMs, but at the same time promised over and over again to do so. Maybe now is the time to put the lists of them and their non-action on the net and in the blogs when they are trying to win the .net registry management.

Afilias sucks. But then again so does ICANN. Den of whores and thieves.

The fake trademarks used to register sunrise names range from "very obvious" to "next to impossible to verify". Sure, some were obviously invalid (even some legitimate trademarks were entered incorrectly), but some used valid registration numbers of trademarks owned by others, and some used foreign trademarks from countries that have no online databases to check.

To me, questioning the validity of the trademarks sidesteps the bigger issue of why trademark owners were allowed preferred access to generic names, when their trademark rights do not extend to the exclusive use of the trademarked term. Many premium generics were "stolen" from us by holders of legitimate trademarks, and I for one think that stinks. The failure of the process to limit sunrise registrations to legitimate TM holders diverted attention from that misguided policy, which I believe may have motivated some of the sunrise fraud. Please note that I'm not defending those that chose to register sunrise names with bogus trademarks.

.INFO is an Afilias product, and Afilias wrote the rules. The rules were bad. The rules were broken. Afilias failed to enforce the rules. The policy for handling the broken rules was bad. Afilias failed to fully implement the policy for handling the broken rules. The stated time limits for implementing the policy for handling the broken rules have now past, so I've decided to move on.

As far as lost registration fees, I would think any registrar that charged a landrush registration fee for a .INFO name that was not available during the landrush phase should refund the money, since the chance of success was zero. The list of names taken during sunrise was available to them, and registrars that had a clue did not waste their landrush queue trying to register names that were already taken.

No, I don't view it as a battle. I understand there are a lot of different perspectives, and a lot of the wounds are still very sore.