tm name sold

[puravida]

The use of an indemnification clause of some sort is highly advisable when transferring a domain name.

Agreed JBH,

However, IF there was no obvious TM, I don't see any issues. Tell the bastard company they were too late and bug off. IF there was no obvious TM like "coke-cola.com", then how was there any wrongdoing?

It's all getting ridiculous. I mean, really. Give me one of your domain names, and I'll send you a UDRP on one of my existing trademarks. I'll make up some false claim about how it violates and then you can pay me $1,000 to go away or you can give me your domain. You see how this is all ridiculous?

2cents,

-Wesley

 

[jberryhilljberryhill is verified member.]

"You see how this is all ridiculous?"

It is no more or less ridiculous as other sorts of legal claims that are an ordinary part of any business.

People go to supermarkets, stage accidents, and then threaten to sue... Ridiculous or not, legal threats are a part of life, and this area in unexceptional in either quantity or quality of same.

 

[Phantom]

dotNetKing wrote: "But just to be a little pedantic doesn't UDRP consider it illegal to register a TMed name with intent of selling it *to the TM owner*?
For example, if someone manages to pick up apple.com when it drops, with the intention of selling it to an apple farm, that would be ok, wouldn't it?"

1. Yep, thats what i said (Registration of TMed domain name with intent of selling is considered unlegal by the UDRP) - no matter you want to sell it to the TM owner or someone else.

2. Selling generic names like "apple" (regardless the TM) can be considered as a permitted domain speculation, but not if you registered it "only" to divert potential customers away from TM owner...

Thats not technically true. Ultimate Search has won almost all of its cases. Domains are NOT property. ICANN is very clear on this point.