

![]() |
| ![]() | |||||||
|
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| Platinum Lifetime Member Name: Marc J. Randazza Last Online: Today 10:49 AM iTrader: (0) Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 252
DNF$: 10 Location: San Diego | A pretty sleazy attempted RDNH In my experience, the doozie arguments usually come from Respondents. But, this Complainant takes an honorable mention. http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/d...2009-0087.html The domain name was <mathiesen.com>. The owner was Allan Mathiesen. Although the complainant had a registered trademark to MATHIESEN, how the hell could they not have realized that a person can own a domain name that is their actual family name? I guess I could see exceptions to this rule. Like if your last name was McDonald and you used mcdonald.TLD to forward traffic to burgerking.com. But, the RDNH in this decision was well deserved. |
| | |
| Sponsored Ads |
| | #2 (permalink) | |
| The Evil Mod Name: Ed Last Online: Today 09:57 PM iTrader: (36) Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,124
DNF$: 151 Location: South Florida
Country: | Quote:
Edit: At least it was rejected - I would have called for reverse hijacking. The complainant made no research to see if the respondent had any legit claims to the name - they just jumped ahead and filed a WIPO.
__________________ Get a Parked.com account today! What's on Draggar's mind? Find out at http://www.draggar.net I'm always looking for dog breed domains Last edited by draggar; 05-08-2009 at 12:44 PM.. | |
| | |
| | #3 (permalink) |
| Platinum Lifetime Member Last Online: Today 05:58 PM iTrader: (22) Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 964
DNF$: 1,145 Location: Los Angeles
Country: | is there such a thing as an unsleazy attempt?
__________________ thestockblog.net |
| | |
| | #5 (permalink) |
| The Evil Mod Name: Ed Last Online: Today 09:57 PM iTrader: (36) Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,124
DNF$: 151 Location: South Florida
Country: | No sense in anyone else trying to compete with that one - it does trump all cases.
__________________ Get a Parked.com account today! What's on Draggar's mind? Find out at http://www.draggar.net I'm always looking for dog breed domains |
| | |
| | #7 (permalink) | |
| Last Online: Today 09:57 PM iTrader: (10) Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,642
DNF$: 13,863 Location: Athens Greece
Country: | This is where we disagree. No matter what crazy use you have for your domain name, if it is your last name they can never never take your domain away in UDRP. If they do then it's ****ed up. How in the world does someone named Mcdonald loses his legitimate rights? If he has burger king ads then it's a trademark infringement. UDRP has nothing to do with that. If you want you can sue his ass away. If you win you can ask for damages, if he can't pay, then take his domain away. It is as simple as that. Also try to prove that he registered his last name in bad faith. Can you do that? If you do then we live in a crazy lawyered up world. Finally anyone who thinks that someone registers apples.com and thinks of apple computers, is either perverted or a lawyer. He needs to get out to the real life: Apples are more famous than apple computers!!! Quote:
__________________ www.bluepixel.gr I like .info! Now accepting .gr domain registrations from any foreign company or individual. Contact me for details. | |
| | |
| | #8 (permalink) | |
| Platinum Lifetime Member Name: Marc J. Randazza Last Online: Today 10:49 AM iTrader: (0) Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 252
DNF$: 10 Location: San Diego | Quote:
Why? UDRP has no right to a reply brief. However, MANY panelists allow a reply if the complainant is accused of RDNH. But, if you get an RDNH ruling, what do you actually win? NOTHING. It feels good to get one. You get bragging rights. But you win absolutely nothing, yet you open the door to a supplemental filing being accepted. | |
| | |
| | #9 (permalink) |
| Last Online: Today 09:57 PM iTrader: (10) Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,642
DNF$: 13,863 Location: Athens Greece
Country: | Are you confusing UDRP with WIPO? NAF accepts additional submissions. And one can file an additional submission at WIPO anyway. With or without RDNH. It's up to the panelist to accept it or not. [QUOTE=marcorandazza;1713339] UDRP has no right to a reply brief. However, MANY panelists allow a reply if the complainant is accused of RDNH. QUOTE]
__________________ www.bluepixel.gr I like .info! Now accepting .gr domain registrations from any foreign company or individual. Contact me for details. |
| | |
| | #10 (permalink) |
| The Evil Mod Name: Ed Last Online: Today 09:57 PM iTrader: (36) Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,124
DNF$: 151 Location: South Florida
Country: | Calling RDNH can get the complainant flagged as a reverse hijacker. We all know that while there are people who buy domains with malicious intentions (which is why WIPO / UDRP was created) there are plenty of people who try to abuse those policies for their own benefit. Its a fact of life - out there there is someone trying to abuse any policy for their own benefit. I'd say any case where a company feels that they have more rights over an individual's name than the individual then it is an abuse of that policy (as long as the person is not infringing on the company's trademark). Bob McDonalds has just as much right to McDonalds.com as the fast food chain as long as he doesn't pretend to be them or infringe on their trademark (selling hamburgers - but really, can they go against him for that if they are his hamburgers?). It comes down to who got it first and if the other is willing to pay the price. Now, I do not think everyone has the right to file a WIPO against a company who owns their name.com. If a company was able to obtain the domain though legal means (hand registration, purchase, or legitimate WIPO) then they do have the right to it (my last name.com would easily sell in the mid $xxx,xxx range if not more - but I am not filing a WIPO against the owner).
__________________ Get a Parked.com account today! What's on Draggar's mind? Find out at http://www.draggar.net I'm always looking for dog breed domains |
| | |
| | #11 (permalink) | ||
| Platinum Lifetime Member Name: Marc J. Randazza Last Online: Today 10:49 AM iTrader: (0) Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 252
DNF$: 10 Location: San Diego | Quote:
NAF might "accept" supplemental filings for a $400 fee, but under the UDRP, the panel has no obligation to accept them. In fact, some panelists make sure to remind the reader of that in any decision where supp filings were submitted. Just because the complainant paid $400, the panel is not obliged to consider it. Similarly, other providers may not charge for supplemental filings, but whether or not to actually review them is within the discretion of the panel. The panel is, however, presented with a more compelling argument for consideration, and more frequently *does* consider supp filings when there is an RDNH accusation. Making an RDNH claim is nothing more than stupid pecker-waving that doesn't actually serve the Respondent's needs. Quote:
You may as well call the complainant a "douchebag." It is meaningless. If RDNH had some teeth, any teeth at all, it would be worthwhile. However, any time I see a Respondent bothering with an RDNH claim, it is either an uneducated self-represented respondent who "learned" domain name law by reading this (or worse) boards, or a domain lawyer who is more interested in his own ability to market himself by waving the "look, I won an RDNH claim" flag around than he/she is concerned with actually serving the client. It is dumb. It may feel good, but until the UDRP is amended to provide some benefit to winning an RDNH, it is plain stupid, and potentially malpractice, to even seek a finding of RDNH. If RDNH exists, the panel can find it without being asked -- and occasionally they do. Last edited by marcorandazza; 05-21-2009 at 07:34 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | ||
| | |
| | #12 (permalink) | |
| The Evil Mod Name: Ed Last Online: Today 09:57 PM iTrader: (36) Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,124
DNF$: 151 Location: South Florida
Country: | Quote:
__________________ Get a Parked.com account today! What's on Draggar's mind? Find out at http://www.draggar.net I'm always looking for dog breed domains | |
| | |
| | #13 (permalink) | |
| Platinum Lifetime Member Name: Marc J. Randazza Last Online: Today 10:49 AM iTrader: (0) Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 252
DNF$: 10 Location: San Diego | I think that is a fair critique of the UDRP. Nominet's procedures for .UK disputes is much better: the Nominet rules provide: Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #14 (permalink) |
| The Evil Mod Name: Ed Last Online: Today 09:57 PM iTrader: (36) Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,124
DNF$: 151 Location: South Florida
Country: | That would only be a slap on the wrist to most people who abuse the processes (but it would be better than nothing).
__________________ Get a Parked.com account today! What's on Draggar's mind? Find out at http://www.draggar.net I'm always looking for dog breed domains |
| | |
| | #15 (permalink) | ||
| Philadelphia Lawyer | Quote:
I cannot open a Berryhill taco restaurant, because there is a federal trademark for tacos in "BERRYHILL" belonging to a company called Berryhill Baja Grill. I could also not open a catering and restaurant business in Idaho, because the pre-eminent Boise chef named John Berryhill has that locked up. The right to use your own name in commerce is by no means absolute. Quote:
You do know that Uzi Nissan was using the domain name for foreign car repairs before he became a "computer retailer", yes? Have you ever considered buying a computer from his site? Try it.
__________________ John Berryhill Ph.d., esq. John-AT-johnberryhill.com Please do not send private messages via dnforum.com, email me directly. Last edited by jberryhill; 05-21-2009 at 10:02 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | ||
| | |
| | #16 (permalink) | ||
| Last Online: Today 09:57 PM iTrader: (10) Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,642
DNF$: 13,863 Location: Athens Greece
Country: | How do you lose a UDRP with element 3 if you already have won with element 2? What you describe is not something that UDRP should decide. These are court cases. Quote:
I am getting goosebumps. Quote:
__________________ www.bluepixel.gr I like .info! Now accepting .gr domain registrations from any foreign company or individual. Contact me for details. Last edited by dvdrip; 05-21-2009 at 10:30 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | ||
| | |
| | #17 (permalink) | |||
| Philadelphia Lawyer | Quote:
In post-UDRP correspondence with the other side, I have used RDNH holdings as evidence of abuse of process, tortious interference and the action provided in 15 USC 1114(2)(d)(iv)-(v), and have settled these claims in exchange for payment, while keeping the domain name. RDNH has no inherent value in the UDRP, but has evidentiary value elsewhere. I strongly agree that it need not be requested by the Respondent. I may lay out the arguments for it, and I've characterized the proceeding as such in a few cases, but the panel is independently obligated to consider it. Quote:
Quote:
There are many panelists who believe it is more important to reach what they believe is a "right result", and do not treat the UDRP very literally.
__________________ John Berryhill Ph.d., esq. John-AT-johnberryhill.com Please do not send private messages via dnforum.com, email me directly. Last edited by jberryhill; 05-21-2009 at 11:03 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | |||
| | |
| | #18 (permalink) | |
| Platinum Lifetime Member Name: Dave Zan Last Online: 11-06-2009 03:32 PM iTrader: (1) Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,662
DNF$: 0 Location: Manila | Quote:
![]() (Hey, Marc, something new to consider your approach to this?)
__________________ Vidi, Vici, Veni! | |
| | |
| | #19 (permalink) | |
| Last Online: Today 09:57 PM iTrader: (10) Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,642
DNF$: 13,863 Location: Athens Greece
Country: | Well if they want me to lose anyway, they don't even have to read the complaint and the response... I am talking about a "fair" panelist. Quote:
But when he calls most domainers morons and stupid, when he calls most lawyers(including you) idiots and dumb, when he calls 2 of the most sought after "Respondent" panelists "both are absolute disgraces to the UDRP process.", then someone has to reply.
__________________ www.bluepixel.gr I like .info! Now accepting .gr domain registrations from any foreign company or individual. Contact me for details. Last edited by dvdrip; 05-22-2009 at 06:12 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | |
| | |
| | #20 (permalink) | ||
| Philadelphia Lawyer | Quote:
Really, getting all fired up about whether a panel issues an RDNH ruling, or whether a respondent should expressly request it, is just not that big a deal. Quote:
But let's say that I register Berryhill.tld, and use the domain name for nothing relating to me, but to advertise my friend's taco restaurant - Jim's Awful Infringing Tacos. Jim competes directly with http://www.berryhillbajagrill.com/ I could see a "fair minded" panelist taking the position that I am not commonly known as "Berryhill", but I am commonly known as "John Berryhill", "John", and a number of other things not fit for publication; and then further deciding that the infringing use is not "legitimate". This may come as a shock, but even fairminded people can disagree on the consequences of the same facts. Here the "unfair" panelist is reaching for a result which he believes is "fair" in a broader sense, and is narrowly interpreting the rule.
__________________ John Berryhill Ph.d., esq. John-AT-johnberryhill.com Please do not send private messages via dnforum.com, email me directly. | ||
| | |
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |