Valuate Domain Names
DNForum - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars
HomeRegisterMembershipsGetting StartedDomain Tools Domain EbooksSEO Software Domain Resellers Advertise

Go Back   DNForum - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars > Domain News, Beginners Guides and Legal Stuff! > Domain Name Legal Issues
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-21-2004, 05:35 AM   #1 (permalink)
DNF Regular
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 11-10-2009 03:03 PM
iTrader: (57)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 681
DNF$: 6,313
Location: Manchester, Tennessee


Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

The Panel finds that offering the disputed domain name for sale on a commercial website in the business of auctioning domain names amounts not only to registration in bad faith but also in use in bad faith,


furthermore

by saying that “There is nothing inherently wrongful in the offer or sale of domain names, without more, such as to justify a finding of bad faith under the Policy. However, as the proprietor of the auction website used by the Respondent advises its potential clients, the fact that domain name registrants may legitimately and in good faith sell domain names does not imply a right in such registrants to sell domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to trademarks or service marks of others without their consent. In several earlier administrative proceedings conducted under the Policy, this sole panelist has determined that offers to sell to the public at large domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to marks of others may constitute bad faith within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy. This is based on the nonexhaustive character of the express list of bad faith factors in paragraph 4(b) of the policy, and the lack of a justification for awarding financial gain to persons for the mere act of registration of the marks of others. In the instant proceeding, respondent has sought to profit from the mere registration of a well-known trademark (preceded by a common descriptive term) as a domain name. There is no evidence on the record of this proceeding that persuades the Panel that Respondent had a purpose for registering the disputed domain name other than for the purpose of selling it for a price in excess of its out-of-pocket costs directly related to the name. The Panel determines such registration and use to be in bad faith” (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Kenneth E. Crews, WIPO Case No. D2000-0580).


tough precendent, this is an interesting case becuase pool was actually called the owner of the name...then the owner said they never paid for it and pool transfered it to them illegally.....

http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/deci...2004-0359.html


page howe
__________________
Page Howe
BestGeos.com (See what we have for your city or area today!)
sitehq is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Ads
Old 07-21-2004, 09:25 AM   #2 (permalink)
Domain Buyer
 
TopNames.com's Avatar
 
Last Online: 08-04-2009 01:26 PM
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,812
DNF$: 1,645


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

very interesting...
__________________
.
TopNames.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 12:09 PM   #3 (permalink)
Platinum Lifetime Member
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 10-20-2009 08:47 PM
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 73
DNF$: 593


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

I remember seeing legos.com on the hotlist, I wouldn't have wanted to touch it.
marzzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 12:31 PM   #4 (permalink)
dax
Platinum Lifetime Member
 
dax's Avatar
 
Last Online: 11-19-2009 04:01 AM
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 331
DNF$: 143
Country:


Thumbs up Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

Quote:
Originally Posted by marzzo
I remember seeing legos.com on the hotlist, I wouldn't have wanted to touch it.
Yes, but the Complainant here is not famous "Lego" company from Denmark (!!!), its some other Lego company from USA (if i got it right)...
So, not only that your move was good, but it was very clever...
This Lego word is potentially very problematic... :-D
dax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 12:37 PM   #5 (permalink)
Platinum Lifetime Member
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 11-06-2009 07:14 PM
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 230
DNF$: 576


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

I own the domain. Too bad I lost the case. Enough said. Life moves on
serra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 12:42 PM   #6 (permalink)
Gold Lifetime Member
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 06-13-2009 03:36 PM
iTrader: (0)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 590
DNF$: 105
Location: Boca Raton, FL

Send a message via ICQ to dtobias

Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

I note that this panelist is one of the rare ones who actually cares about the distinction between different TLDs, as the response mentions, with regard to the claims by the respondent that the domain was for a noncommercial site, "the second Respondent could have chosen as an alternative a different TLD, also considering that the .com TLD should not be registered and used for non-profit activities."
dtobias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 01:37 PM   #7 (permalink)
Domain Buyer
 
TopNames.com's Avatar
 
Last Online: 08-04-2009 01:26 PM
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,812
DNF$: 1,645


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

"Moreover, these activities demonstrate bad faith registration and use of the disputed domain name in violation of the Policy under paragraph 4(b)(i) which promulgates that bad faith can be found where there is evidence of “circumstances indicating that [Respondent has] registered or [Respondent has] acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of the complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of [Respondent's] documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name.”

Legos.com closed on Pool.com for $5,402.00. It seems to read that the panel would have allowed the respondent to ask for a $5,402 sale price. However, he asked for more (I am guessing at this) and then a complaint was filed.

Maybe John or Ari can jump in and give their opinion.
__________________
.
TopNames.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 02:03 PM   #8 (permalink)
Platinum Lifetime Member
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 11-06-2009 07:14 PM
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 230
DNF$: 576


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

Any question please PM me directly. As I mention on my first post, I don't want to discuss this any longer

Last edited by serra; 07-21-2004 at 04:20 PM..
serra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 02:04 PM   #9 (permalink)
DNF Addict
 
stuff's Avatar
 
Name: Whois Whois
Last Online: Yesterday 04:23 PM
iTrader: (40)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,312
DNF$: 128
Location: away


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

Quote:
Originally Posted by serra
Nope. Domain State members reported the auction to before the auction take place. Luckily, I found the thread.
FYI:I pay only $60 registration fee, Pool decided to refund the money after months of frustrating complaint trying to reach their supervisor.
So, the domain was never offerred to the complainant. As I said, not worth discussing $60 domain
'


legos.com for $60 ?
__________________
Zero Accomplisher and .mobi millionaire
stuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 02:07 PM   #10 (permalink)
Platinum Lifetime Member
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 11-06-2009 07:14 PM
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 230
DNF$: 576


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

Any question please PM me directly. As I mention on my first post, I don't want to discuss this any longer

Last edited by serra; 07-21-2004 at 04:21 PM..
serra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 02:09 PM   #11 (permalink)
Domain Buyer
 
TopNames.com's Avatar
 
Last Online: 08-04-2009 01:26 PM
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,812
DNF$: 1,645


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

I show $5,402 on the Pool list and I had bid at least $1,000 on the domain...something does not sound right.
__________________
.
TopNames.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 02:15 PM   #12 (permalink)
Platinum Lifetime Member
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 11-06-2009 07:14 PM
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 230
DNF$: 576


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

Any question please PM me directly. As I mention on my first post, I don't want to discuss this any longer

Last edited by serra; 07-21-2004 at 04:20 PM..
serra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 03:49 PM   #13 (permalink)
Domain Addict
 
clemzonguy's Avatar
 
Name: Aaron
Last Online: Today 07:01 AM
iTrader: (58)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,489
DNF$: 4,429
Location: SC
Country:

Send a message via AIM to clemzonguy

Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

I emailed the company prior to POOL getting the domain to tell them about the domain dropping. I don't know if this had any effect or not but I am sure they were quite aware about loosing the domain.
__________________
BrokeringDomains.com
Caretake.com LandscapingService.com Multimillion.com Dropshippers.us Hammock.us
clemzonguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 03:49 PM   #14 (permalink)
Former DNF Admin
 
MediaHound's Avatar
 
Name: Jarred
Last Online: 11-12-2009 05:38 PM
iTrader: (83)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,922
DNF$: 11,110
Location: Florida
Country:


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

If TopNames bid $1,000 how on earth did you score it for $60, serra?
__________________
Submit your domains here:
www.Bido.com/SubmitDomains
While you are on Bido please be sure to vote for the domains you want to see go to auction. Login and click the Vote tab.
MediaHound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 04:04 PM   #15 (permalink)
Platinum Lifetime Member
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 11-06-2009 07:14 PM
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 230
DNF$: 576


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

Any question please PM me directly. As I mention on my first post, I don't want to discuss this any longer. Thanks for your understanding.

Last edited by serra; 07-21-2004 at 04:26 PM..
serra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 04:05 PM   #16 (permalink)
Former DNF Admin
 
MediaHound's Avatar
 
Name: Jarred
Last Online: 11-12-2009 05:38 PM
iTrader: (83)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,922
DNF$: 11,110
Location: Florida
Country:


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

refund and credit are after the fact.
Did you win the auction for 5K+?
__________________
Submit your domains here:
www.Bido.com/SubmitDomains
While you are on Bido please be sure to vote for the domains you want to see go to auction. Login and click the Vote tab.
MediaHound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 04:14 PM   #17 (permalink)
Platinum Lifetime Member
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 11-06-2009 07:14 PM
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 230
DNF$: 576


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

Any question please PM me directly. As I mention on my first post, I don't want to discuss this any longer. Thanks for your understanding.

Last edited by serra; 07-21-2004 at 04:27 PM..
serra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 04:21 PM   #18 (permalink)
Former DNF Admin
 
MediaHound's Avatar
 
Name: Jarred
Last Online: 11-12-2009 05:38 PM
iTrader: (83)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,922
DNF$: 11,110
Location: Florida
Country:


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

OK, have a nice day.
__________________
Submit your domains here:
www.Bido.com/SubmitDomains
While you are on Bido please be sure to vote for the domains you want to see go to auction. Login and click the Vote tab.
MediaHound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 05:20 PM   #19 (permalink)
Gold Lifetime Member
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 10-04-2008 02:07 PM
iTrader: (0)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 327
DNF$: 1,269
Location: UK
Country:


Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

Surely similar words can be (have been) registered for ANY other goods or services?

Was Serra doing anything illegal with domain?

From USPTO:

Word Mark LEGO
Goods and Services IC 011. US 013. G & S: Irrigation Equipment-Namely, Sprinklers, Drippers and Parts Thereof, Hose Adapters and Connectors, Spike and Slide Bases, Plugs, Caps, Valves, Sprinkler Heads, Nozzles, and Parts Therefor. FIRST USE: 19290000. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19650324

Owner (REGISTRANT) Lego M. Lemelshtrich Ltd. COMPANY ISRAEL 100 Petach Tikwa Rd. Tel Aviv ISRAEL
Garry Anderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2004, 07:54 PM   #20 (permalink)
Platinum Lifetime Member
No Avatar
 
Last Online: 11-06-2009 07:14 PM
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 230
DNF$: 576


Smile Re: Legos.com WIPO decision against pool

Lego is a word in my spoken language. Please read the case yourself so you are not repeating question on what is already said in the case. Enough said. Again, guys PM me if you have any question. Please understand I cannot talk freely because this is a public forum.

Probably you misunderstood, let me clarify:
The person on the whois is not me. I just said I own the domain. I never said my name was on the case.
If you read the case: "the case was against Pool.com" as the title of this thread.

Last edited by serra; 07-21-2004 at 08:25 PM..
serra is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ask for a wipo decision in the case of trademarked domain boreal Domain Name Legal Issues 2 10-27-2003 07:03 PM
Join in thanking members who offer advice on general legal questions izopod Domain Name Legal Issues 38 09-12-2003 10:25 PM
Interesting wipo decision Domain Name News 36 05-28-2002 08:20 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 AM.
Copyright @2001-2009 DNForum.com