Does a DN sale / transfer destroy the "first in time" defense?

[pakkman]

Kind of a legal-oriented Q, but here goes.

My understanding is that if a DN owner receives a complaint / demand-for-transfer from a TM-holder, he can defeat it by showing that he acquired the DN BEFORE the TM was registered. (Correct?)

My question is this: what if the DN was indeed originally purchased before the TM-registration, but was sold in a secondary market after the TM was registered. So User A purchases, say, fancywidgets.com, in 1997, then a company starts selling Fancy Widgets in 1999 and registers a TM for "Fancy Widgets"...what if User B buys fancywidgets.com from User A in 2002, with the express intent to sell it to the new Fancy Widgets company...can he defeat a complain from Fancy Widgets by showing that the DN was bought before TM registration, or was that defense destroyed because he only acquired it after TM registration?

 

[Midnight Silver]

#1 TM Holder is not your Boss in this situation -- You Are -- And you are the the the "Main Guy" in Control of this Domain Situation and They should be very Polite & Smart because mistakes in the DN Biz Buying -- Mean Higher Cost or a missed out on a good deal...

#2 TM Holder should have been bright enough to Get the Dot_Com before even thinking about getting the TM.

#3 He Should Not be sending you a complaint -- he should be sending you a Polite Offer (probably low-ball) to see if he can get something going where he can Easily acquire this Domain he definitely needs Very Much for his Business... So you price it accordingly !!!

#4 Also Warning -- The EM form TM holder -- "complaint / demand-for-transfer from a TM-holder" -- looks a little to a lot suspicious side and the DN Scumbags try anything every Day to get The Good Deals.

#5 User A or B Should Never say they Bought FancyWigets.com to Sell to the TM Holder --- any and all other reasons they bought or sold it is Great !!!

#6 Send TM Holder and EM or TEL Call Stating the Price You Want --- They Really need this DN Dot_Com Badly --- if they are for real !!!

Very Best to You !!!

 

[Cartoonz]

That's the most astoundingly stupid advice ever.

The answer to the original poster's question is "Yes, your original plan to hold up the TM holder for the name is without any protection whatsoever from the original registration date"

I really can't tell which of you is more unethical. You both obviously have no clue as to how the laws read on this.