I own a domain that a big corporation wants to sue me into acquiring. Help(reddit.com)
reddit.com
I own a domain that a big corporation wants to sue me into acquiring. Help
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/kyde9/i_own_a_domain_that_a_big_corporation_wants_to/
22 comments
I think the best advice he got was to contact the EFF, who are getting together a list of lawyers who will help him pro bono.
Didn't see that advice, and don't know much about EFF, but yes, anything that puts him in touch with a lawyer who actually knows what he's doing is good advice.
I might also note that when hiring an attorney, you want to shop around, even if you're getting pro bono work. Check references and ask around (you can ask the lawyers you're interviewing about the other lawyers you've interviewed). Don't just settle on the first guy you come across that has a diploma hanging on his wall.
I might also note that when hiring an attorney, you want to shop around, even if you're getting pro bono work. Check references and ask around (you can ask the lawyers you're interviewing about the other lawyers you've interviewed). Don't just settle on the first guy you come across that has a diploma hanging on his wall.
It's been auto-collapsed somewhere in the thread, direct link to the particular comment tree: http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/kyde9/i_own_a_dom...
Their initial offer was $150. I said no, that I had put way too much money into it for that low of a price. They came back with $250.
Anyone who's bickering about $150 vs $250 to acquire a domain is not a "big corporation". The OP is being bluffed.
Anyone who's bickering about $150 vs $250 to acquire a domain is not a "big corporation". The OP is being bluffed.
I looked around the WIPO site and found an arbitration case that meets the facts the reddit poster claimed. Either he found a WIPO case and decided to make it a huge "AskReddit," or, yes, the OP is going up against a quite large company.
(Not linking here in an attempt to preserve privacy.)
(Not linking here in an attempt to preserve privacy.)
Indeed, there is a case that seems to match all elements (domain starting with a w).
If that case is indeed the right one, the complainants have had a trademark on their mark since 1953, and yet they let the domain be first registered in 2005, and then bought by the current owner in 2011.
So, they could either have created the domain before 2005 or buy it between 2005 and 2011, but they chose to go against the current owner in June of this year only.
There should be laws against such carelessness.
If that case is indeed the right one, the complainants have had a trademark on their mark since 1953, and yet they let the domain be first registered in 2005, and then bought by the current owner in 2011.
So, they could either have created the domain before 2005 or buy it between 2005 and 2011, but they chose to go against the current owner in June of this year only.
There should be laws against such carelessness.
In fact the domain in dispute is a .org, while the company already owns the .com; the .net belongs to a squatter.
I think what happened is, the company didn't care about other tlds than the .com; the .org was bought in January of this year by the current owner, legitimately, but, I presume, from a squatter (and that's why he says that buying the domain in the first place was expensive enough).
And suddenly the company decides they need other tlds; from their point of view they're all squatters; they're wrong, but their line of reasoning is not absurd.
I think what happened is, the company didn't care about other tlds than the .com; the .org was bought in January of this year by the current owner, legitimately, but, I presume, from a squatter (and that's why he says that buying the domain in the first place was expensive enough).
And suddenly the company decides they need other tlds; from their point of view they're all squatters; they're wrong, but their line of reasoning is not absurd.
How can you preserve privacy of something posted to reddit?
At the moment, he's chosen not to reveal his name, his domain, or the company in question.
I think it's silly, publicity can only help him in a case like this, but we don't get to make that choice for him.
That said, he'd be doing everyone a public service by naming the company. Judging by the WIPO case (which I also found), they're quite inept and shouldn't be trusted with anything more complicated than lincoln logs.
I think it's silly, publicity can only help him in a case like this, but we don't get to make that choice for him.
That said, he'd be doing everyone a public service by naming the company. Judging by the WIPO case (which I also found), they're quite inept and shouldn't be trusted with anything more complicated than lincoln logs.
this was my thought as well. but others seem to disagree; my reddit comment to that effect was voted down, and others here seem to have looked up the actual case and think it's legit.
Why would a serious law department make an offer that domain squatters regularly turn down when selling obscure domains to nobodies like me? I tried to buy prgmr.net and prgrmr.com (note the extra 'r') from the squatters that had them; I offered $300 a pop, but they wouldn't budge from three grand. (they can keep 'em if they think they can get three grand of value out of them. What do the economists say? the highest value use? They aren't worth two new servers to me, that's for sure.)
It sounded like a grand or two would have made the guy happy, and it sounds like the company in question has already sunk several times that into legal fees. Are serious companies really that irrational?
Why would a serious law department make an offer that domain squatters regularly turn down when selling obscure domains to nobodies like me? I tried to buy prgmr.net and prgrmr.com (note the extra 'r') from the squatters that had them; I offered $300 a pop, but they wouldn't budge from three grand. (they can keep 'em if they think they can get three grand of value out of them. What do the economists say? the highest value use? They aren't worth two new servers to me, that's for sure.)
It sounded like a grand or two would have made the guy happy, and it sounds like the company in question has already sunk several times that into legal fees. Are serious companies really that irrational?
Actually it is common in domain name disputes like this for large corporations represented by even white show law firms to offer only trivial amounts of money for domain names. Amounts that fall far below the cost of pursuing a case legally.
UDRP specifically refers to "out of pocket costs" so offering a small amount of money allows the complainant to not exceed that without jeopardizing and potentially enhancing (by baiting the owner) any future legal actions.
One reason is to send a message of fear to the registrant that the company that wants the name is unreasonable and crazy and will take all actions at any cost to get the name.
Same strategy in personal injury cases. Some companies will settle for any reasonable amount because the legal cost is high. Others would rather send a message by spending three times the money on legal costs.
UDRP specifically refers to "out of pocket costs" so offering a small amount of money allows the complainant to not exceed that without jeopardizing and potentially enhancing (by baiting the owner) any future legal actions.
One reason is to send a message of fear to the registrant that the company that wants the name is unreasonable and crazy and will take all actions at any cost to get the name.
Same strategy in personal injury cases. Some companies will settle for any reasonable amount because the legal cost is high. Others would rather send a message by spending three times the money on legal costs.
That may constitute a bad faith attempt to profit from the domain from the trademark holder, and may cost him the domain.
Why is that bad faith? He simply said that it's worth way more for him. Besides, if I were in his shoes, I would fight "bad faith" with "bad faith" - if a company would threaten to sue me, then I would certainly bump the price some 10x or so.
(1) the manner in which the domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
(2) why the Respondent (domain-name holder) should be considered as having no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name(s) that is/are the subject of the complaint; and
(3) why the domain name(s) should be considered as having been registered and being used in bad faith
------------------------------------------------
The issue is registered AND being used. It would be pretty hard to argue that it was registered in bad faith when it is his name. Of course, ask the Nissan guy about this, there are exceptions.
(2) why the Respondent (domain-name holder) should be considered as having no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name(s) that is/are the subject of the complaint; and
(3) why the domain name(s) should be considered as having been registered and being used in bad faith
------------------------------------------------
The issue is registered AND being used. It would be pretty hard to argue that it was registered in bad faith when it is his name. Of course, ask the Nissan guy about this, there are exceptions.
Every time I see a story like this, I think about http://nissan.com/
how did they have so much money to fight the cases against nissan? Their website seems like it was stuck in 1998. Why didn't they try to sell it to nissan motors for like a mill or something?
What amuses me is that the prices are all current, so the site is clearly still being updated... maybe they're going for that "Classic Internet" look.
They've been taking donations http://www.digest.com/Donations.php
I would guess that nissan motors didnt actually want to shell out 1M to buy the name. They probably offered a paltry sum, which Uzi rejected, and then tried pulling a digital version of Eminent Domain. If everyone knew how long and how expensive the proposition would be, I'm sure Nissan Motors would have preferred to just have paid a million for the domain
I would guess that nissan motors didnt actually want to shell out 1M to buy the name. They probably offered a paltry sum, which Uzi rejected, and then tried pulling a digital version of Eminent Domain. If everyone knew how long and how expensive the proposition would be, I'm sure Nissan Motors would have preferred to just have paid a million for the domain
[deleted](2)
I have some experience of a similar situation, having at one point run a web dev blog at ilovejackdaniels.com, before the JD legal team contacted me ... and I'm on a new domain now.
The problem, as explained to me by a lawyer (I am not a lawyer, so don't go taking this as legal advice, as I'm paraphrasing what I was told), is that legal departments for really big corporations just care about winning. It doesn't really matter whether they are in the right or not. What's going to make it difficult for you is that they have a huge amount of resources that you don't.
It sounds in your case like they have no actual case for cybersquatting or similar. But that doesn't mean they won't sue you. And if you can't afford to be sued, then that's an automatic win for them.
You also need to evaluate what level of stress and trouble you're prepared to go to to protect the domain. It may suck, but there will be a point at which it would be better for your sanity and your health to let them have the domain and get as much as you can out of them for it.
If I were in your shoes (and I was) I would first visit a lawyer. Get some proper advice.
The problem, as explained to me by a lawyer (I am not a lawyer, so don't go taking this as legal advice, as I'm paraphrasing what I was told), is that legal departments for really big corporations just care about winning. It doesn't really matter whether they are in the right or not. What's going to make it difficult for you is that they have a huge amount of resources that you don't.
It sounds in your case like they have no actual case for cybersquatting or similar. But that doesn't mean they won't sue you. And if you can't afford to be sued, then that's an automatic win for them.
You also need to evaluate what level of stress and trouble you're prepared to go to to protect the domain. It may suck, but there will be a point at which it would be better for your sanity and your health to let them have the domain and get as much as you can out of them for it.
If I were in your shoes (and I was) I would first visit a lawyer. Get some proper advice.
I'm sorry of asking, but what's wrong in the US when you go to the court alone, without the lawyer? I'm asking because I live in Europe, I did that in civil case and I did won. Actually judge in the end of the first day advised me to hire a lawyer, I said I cannot afford that and then government pointed one to me.
In this case there's obviously no cybersquatting, so what's the excuse not going alone?
The risk is that it's not just the domain name at stake. A lost court case can result in an order to pay the opposition's costs. For a large legal team, that can be expensive.
Wouldn't it be sensible for the law to be that the loser has to pay the lesser of the two legal team's costs?
I don't think so, no. Why should a person or company be financially punished for doing nothing wrong? Your suggestion means that if you are sued and pay for a decent lawyer to defend you, but your opponent pays someone dirt cheap (or no-win, no-fee), and then you win, you will be out of pocket for your own defence.
The fact that your domain doesn't exist anymore is somewhat troubling.
> I have some experience of a similar situation, having at one point run a web dev blog at ilovejackdaniels.com
it was awesome. Is that why the site died?
it was awesome. Is that why the site died?
It's still around, just called Added Bytes (http://www.addedbytes.com/) now.
I moved it to a new domain, as scq was kind enough to also comment. It's at http://www.addedbytes.com now.
You can always file a USPTO TTAB opposition to any of that company's registered trademarks. Or several. It's when you do several that they tend to get our their checkbook--each opposition can cost mid-five-figures for a big firm to defend, or in some cases even six.
He states "They've already tried going through WIPO and lost. Now they are telling me that if I don't accept a ridiculously undervalued offer they are going to file litigation against me. I am a college student and can't afford a lawyer. Can anyone give me advice? What should I do?"
Something is a little fishy about this. It doesn't make sense that he won the UDRP without an attorney but hasn't been able to figure out an attorney that can give him free legal advice on these issues. (Ref: reddit comments) (See http://www.esqwire.com who gives free advice and has probably won the most cases). In order to respond to the UDRP he would have had to do some research and would have turned up the obvious suspects in this industry (Berryhill, Goldberger etc.)
While people have won UDRP's without a response (I've seen it happen) it is pretty rare.
Something is a little fishy about this. It doesn't make sense that he won the UDRP without an attorney but hasn't been able to figure out an attorney that can give him free legal advice on these issues. (Ref: reddit comments) (See http://www.esqwire.com who gives free advice and has probably won the most cases). In order to respond to the UDRP he would have had to do some research and would have turned up the obvious suspects in this industry (Berryhill, Goldberger etc.)
While people have won UDRP's without a response (I've seen it happen) it is pretty rare.
I had a similar experience with Catepillar. They wanted to buy a domain I owned for over 10 years, but was just parked at the time. They offered me $1000 for the domain, I vehemently told them no. They threatened to sue me and we settled before they took action at $5,000. I always thought the domain was worth more, but at least its being used for something now.
On the converse of this, someone has been cybersquatting my last name for about 10 years. Any advice on how to get it?
Details: I own the .co.uk version, but not the .com. My dad has had a company registered (not in the US) with the name in it. The cybersquatter seems to have squatted a bunch of dutch last names and isn't associated with the name at all.
Details: I own the .co.uk version, but not the .com. My dad has had a company registered (not in the US) with the name in it. The cybersquatter seems to have squatted a bunch of dutch last names and isn't associated with the name at all.
I'm on the same boat. In my case, I even attempted to contact using the "make an offer" form and never received a reply. Strange way to do business.
I would never do that. Domain squatters squat just waiting for someone to come around and ask for the domain, that's why they buy them in the first place, and then they try to sell at exorbitant rates ($15k-$20k in my experience). Doubtless some companies pay that, which makes squatting profitable.
If you express interest in a domain name, the squatter knows they should renew it forever because at some point when your company makes more money or whatever you'll buy them out for the asking price or something pretty close to it. If you don't express interest and no one else does either, and traffic is minimal, the squatter will drop the domain as unprofitable (no money from the ads on the parking page, no interested buyers = unprofitable domain).
If you express interest in a domain name, the squatter knows they should renew it forever because at some point when your company makes more money or whatever you'll buy them out for the asking price or something pretty close to it. If you don't express interest and no one else does either, and traffic is minimal, the squatter will drop the domain as unprofitable (no money from the ads on the parking page, no interested buyers = unprofitable domain).
I agree with you, but I did wait around a decade or so before I just got curious one day. It's a fairly uncommon last name and the domain would just be for personal use. Oh well.
There is no "make an offer" in my case. It just redirects to an electric bike website.
I'm in a similar boat. A Norwegian name squatting company holds a bunch of last name domains not really using them for anything besides linking to their site "so everyone with that last name will be able to use it".
The problem is the they want like a dollar per month to give you one email address. I'm well aware that is not much but it's annoying that they claim to do this to "share the wealth" of that domain name with everyone with that name. The problem is they are taking money for email addresses and you can't use the domain name (or even a subdomain) for anything.
I'm more interested in having the domain for my family, I would have no problem giving subdomains and email addresses to anyone with my name contacting me.
At least according to Norwegian law (which is probably similar to International domain laws?) you do not really have a case unless you can prove you have the rights to own that domain. And since you do not really require anything but a name to own a .com you will probably have a hard time doing so :-/
The problem is the they want like a dollar per month to give you one email address. I'm well aware that is not much but it's annoying that they claim to do this to "share the wealth" of that domain name with everyone with that name. The problem is they are taking money for email addresses and you can't use the domain name (or even a subdomain) for anything.
I'm more interested in having the domain for my family, I would have no problem giving subdomains and email addresses to anyone with my name contacting me.
At least according to Norwegian law (which is probably similar to International domain laws?) you do not really have a case unless you can prove you have the rights to own that domain. And since you do not really require anything but a name to own a .com you will probably have a hard time doing so :-/
"A Norwegian name squatting company holds a bunch of last name domains not really using them for anything besides linking to their site "so everyone with that last name will be able to use it".
The problem is the they want like a dollar per month to give you one email address. "
That's a perfectly reasonably business model. Renting email addresses is quite clearly "using" a domain. It might not be a hackernews/startup-web-business, but they've thought of a way to try and make a living and registered the domain first - what makes you think you have any sort of claim to "have rights to own taht domain" than they do?
The problem is the they want like a dollar per month to give you one email address. "
That's a perfectly reasonably business model. Renting email addresses is quite clearly "using" a domain. It might not be a hackernews/startup-web-business, but they've thought of a way to try and make a living and registered the domain first - what makes you think you have any sort of claim to "have rights to own taht domain" than they do?
Yeah I am aware it's a perfectly good business model. But this specific type of domain squatting is incredibly annoying. I couldn't find any information on their website now but they were charging a lot more for just being able to point a sub-domain somewhere.
I'm sure I would have found the idea clever if I had thought of it first but the wording on their site makes it seem like they are trying to do people a good service when it seems their sole purpose is to make money (which is understandable).
I'm sure I would have found the idea clever if I had thought of it first but the wording on their site makes it seem like they are trying to do people a good service when it seems their sole purpose is to make money (which is understandable).
If this is the company I think it is, then they took my last name as well. They're legitimately using it, even if you may not like the use. I got around it by using the .me extension instead. You can always pick one of those others instead of .com.
Yeah I just own a few other domains for email instead.
Another problem for me is that a huge international (dutch originally) rubber company happens to share my last name with me. The .org/.net domains and a few others were free for a long time but I never thought of registering them which is sad as they recently did.
This site may provide some help. They sold licensed fabric items on eBay that contained Disney characters. Repeat, licensed. Disney tried to take them down using DMCA and other strongarm tactics. They won against Disney using DIY
techniques--no lawyers involved! I know it's not the same situation but you would be well advised to visit their site at http://www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/Articles/Tabberone/Fight...
The only mistake he made was asking Reddit instead of a lawyer who specializes in dealing with boneheaded corporate maneuvers.
Otherwise, I wish him luck.
Otherwise, I wish him luck.
Why was asking Reddit a mistake?
Put yourself in the OP's shoes. You're a college student and you get a notice like this handed to you. It's not like you have an IP lawyer on retainer or cash to run out and hire one instantly.
In fact, one helpful redditor pointed out that his college might have a law school that would be willing to help with his case as a teaching exercise. I bet the OP knew nothing about that, and that's worth the price of visiting reddit alone.
Put yourself in the OP's shoes. You're a college student and you get a notice like this handed to you. It's not like you have an IP lawyer on retainer or cash to run out and hire one instantly.
In fact, one helpful redditor pointed out that his college might have a law school that would be willing to help with his case as a teaching exercise. I bet the OP knew nothing about that, and that's worth the price of visiting reddit alone.
Simple. It was a mistake because it looks like the kid would accept the offer if it was larger. Go to an IP lawyer and watch dollar signs pop out of their eyes. In a case like this, they'll assist with negotiating a fair price on contingency. If the kid really doesn't want to sell, he can go to EFF or get a lawyer to do this pro-bono. They love this sort of David vs Goliath stuff.
How would he know that an IP lawyer would be eager to take the case? Is that supposed to be common sense or something?
You're suggesting an IP lawyer would take the case on a no-cure, no-pay basis? Why is your HN advice more credible than the Reddit advice? Are you a lawyer? Have you dealt with this situation? Or are you in fact armchair lawyering as much as the Reddit commenters?
I asked my wife, who is an IP lawyer. That was her advice. Of course, you would expect a lawyer to recommend to see another lawyer, but in this case, it makes sense since there's $$$ involved.
I don't know about in the US, but a lot of UK universities will have a pro-bono law team that will help students with legal problems (run by professors but with law students in observance so they can get some "real" world experience).
Even going so far as entertaining an offer could screw him in court. He needs an IP lawyer familiar with this ASAP.
This has just reminded me I need to put up a splash page with my contact information on my domain, which is myfirstmylast.com
Currently there is nothing there, but I use it for email every day - it'd be a shame to lose the domain because it looks like I'm not using it to outsiders.
Currently there is nothing there, but I use it for email every day - it'd be a shame to lose the domain because it looks like I'm not using it to outsiders.
There's no domain registration requirement for .com (that I'm aware of) for you to have a public web page on a domain.
Exactly. A domain can be used for many things, not just HTTP.
There's some good advice on the reddit thread and some poor. Making a counter offer to the company could be construed as intent to make a buck on the sale and end up muddying the water and causing him problems. Best thing in these cases is to refuse offers.
If they are trying to muscle you out of something which is not rightfully theirs then level the playing field. Get as much publicity as you can from the media, shame them into backing off or making a decent offer if it is something they really want.
The fact that they start with offering you money weakens their case considerably. That said, get yourself a really good lawyer if you want to hold on to it and you think you have a strong enough case, be prepared to pay them a lot of money.
I hope he kicks their butt.
Hire a lawyer on contingency and get the biggest payout you can, for goodness sake. Then set up a new domain for yourself and count your blessings...winning the lottery is very rare.
What constitutes cybersquatting or having the rights to a domain you purchased? When can someone who feels they could better use the domain sue?
I have never sold a domain. I have given domains away for FREE to Open Source for 12 years, but I have been sued. It does not seem that the Big Corporation has any rights in your case, but they have Big Lawyers, who can sue you into the ground. Be VERY careful
Good luck to him!
sounds like a job for 4chan.
The best advice in that thread was to seek out on-campus legal aid. At the law school I went to, there were clinics that dealt specifically with entrepreneurship and IP. Look around, I'm sure other schools run similar clinics. You generally don't even need to attend these schools to utilize their services.
At the very least, if you can't find something like that, or the deal you're working on is a little above their pay grade, some professor on campus can point you to somebody that does good pro bono work or is willing to work on contingency.
If it just turns into a negotiation, you could do this yourself, but, honestly, you're probably going to get taken to the cleaners, both financially and emotionally, if you end up negotiating against professionals. Get a lawyer. There's no shame in it. http://www.ajkesslerblog.com/hired-guns/