Panasonic.org

[DeCal]

My company is currently doing some work for Panasonic and we require the domain panasonic.org. Someone has it and has offered it for $2000. I think that i expensive as it is panasonic themselves that want it. Do they have any legal right to it?

[James Names]

Looks like this is the company holding the domain.

quotes@DomainResearch.org

Domain Research and Sales
Vytauto Mail Box # 60
Radviliskis, LT LT-5120
LT
+358-9-253-600-53
+358-9-253-600-53


They don't appear to have any legitimate use for the domain, so it would be an easy domain for your client to win in a UDRP dispute. Unfortunately the process costs $1500 and takes two months, and the expense to prepare a case against the domain squatter.

It may be best if you can negotiate the price down to something that is fair to everyone.

[DeCal]

RJ, what can i do with it now though?

[DeCal]

would they not release it do you think if i told them this was what was going to happen?

[James Names]

1) UDRP domain dispute. As I mentioned to you before, you can use the UDRP as a bargaining tool if you file a dispute you may be able to reason the domain holder to a lower figure and request a refund of the UDRP fees. Otherwise, proceed with the dispute, file your complaint, wait two months and get the domain transferred to you in a decision.

Many companies use UDRP even in cases where it would be cheaper to buy the domain from the domain squatter, for moral reasons.

2) International lawsuit, though this would be far more expensive than $2000

3) Have your lawyers try to scare them with C&D letters, lawsuit threats, etc

4) Pay the $2000 they are asking. Be sure to use an escrow.

5) and your only other option, keep negotiating and hope to get lucky.


RJ

[James Names]

Originally posted by DeCal
would they not release it do you think if i told them this was what was going to happen?

Not likely, since it usually doesn't cost the domain holder anything to have a UDRP dispute filed against them, even if they lose.

[DeCal]

hmmm, thanks, whats a C&D letter?

[James Names]

A Cease & Desist letter is an offical notice that they are offending your trademark and demands that the domain holder immediately cease using the name and turn it over to you. It's the first step in any legal case like this.

A lawyer usually writes these up. I'm sure Panasonic's legal team can help you. If not, there are some quality lawyers that frequent this forum.

There are many members on this board that have received their fair share of C&D letters.

[DeCal]

is there anyone here that can get me this domain back? If so what is your fee for it?

Thanks RJ, been a great help!

[greggish]

Just have Panasonic give the guy the 2 G's and get the domain. No need to make it more complicated than that.

[DeCal]

does everyone else agree with that approach?

[DeCal]

are there any lawyers here that would send a C&D letter or can i send one myself?

[pljones]

Are you authorized by Panasonic to acquire this name? If so, why not coordinate your efforts with them on the recovery. It seems that this would be a slam dunk for them.

[DeCal]

We are authorized but we want to put a package to them and say, 'look, this is what you need to do' ideally.

[pljones]

Dean,

Feel free to contact me with questions off list (contact info available at sgbdc.com).

[DeCal]

pljones,

can't find your email address, can you pm it to me or email
thanks

[jberryhill]

Dean,

Despite what several people are saying here about the UDRP, there are quite a few cases in which the complainant lost because the complainant was not the actual trademark owner. A UDRP panel may very well decline to transfer the domain name to you, because you do not own the mark.

Panasonic spent boatloads going after panasonic.com, and that case itself was used as the template for current US law relating to domain names. However, if they want the name, they should be the ones to go after it, not you.

[DeCal]

i understand that but we have writen authority for it.

[jberryhill]

"i understand that but we have writen authority for it."

Written authority for what? To use the mark or go after the domain name. The agent for the Backstreet Boys was deemed to be an improper party for going after domain names based on the group's name. Likewise the NBA lost knicks.com because the NBA was not the team. Another example is a UDRP panel questioning the authority of an IP holding company for PriceWaterhouseCoopers to pursue a UDRP on behalf of PriceWaterhouseCoopers.

Whether Panasonic has "authorized" you to pursue a UDRP is tangential to whether some panelist may take it upon him or herself to read the policy in a manner that would not permit transfer of the domain name to any party other than the trademark owner, regardless of such authorization.

You have to consider this from a panelist's perspective. There are no live hearings, and all they have to look at are pieces of paper. Given the fact that UDRP proceedings are easily spoof, one might think it is a good idea to only transfer domain names to the primary owner of the mark, and not a claimed licensee.

However, it is not clear what the scope of your authorization is, and this question is a bit on the "too specific to be of general legal interest" topic.

[dtobias]

I would think that the Panasonic company has sufficient legal staff to pursue a claim of this sort themselves without farming it out to some licensee who has to ask for advice on public message boards, wouldn't you think?