Calculator.com.au

[Timmy]

Cool thanks for the reponses.

I guess what I would like to see is a clearly defined set of rules from the body administering the policy. Maybe I'm on my own here, but I couldn't afford to invest $5000:

a) for a name only to have it stripped.
b) and then have fork out cash to fight a legal battle to defend it.

Obvious answer is, "Timmy, you answered your own question so shut up and just don't bid on this one".

BUT, it's hard to weight up the risks if you don't know what the REAL risks are.

 

[Rob Johnson]

Cool thanks for the reponses.

I guess what I would like to see is a clearly defined set of rules from the body administering the policy. Maybe I'm on my own here, but I couldn't afford to invest $5000:

a) for a name only to have it stripped.
b) and then have fork out cash to fight a legal battle to defend it.

Obvious answer is, "Timmy, you answered your own question so shut up and just don't bid on this one".

BUT, it's hard to weight up the risks if you don't know what the REAL risks are.

Agree with you on this one, it's a shame thou, they have allot of potential.

 

[Simon Johnson]

Hi guys, new here and just wanted to ask if anybody knows if because they registered a company "CALCULATORS PTY LTD", would they have any claim over the name to try and get it back from whoever wins the auctions?
Rob

Its a complaints driven process, so *if* they did file a complaint, then it would be investigated on its merits.

Personally, I would not bid on it.

 

[Rob Johnson]

Its a complaints driven process, so *if* they did file a complaint, then it would be investigated on its merits.

Personally, I would not bid on it.

Cheers, already made my mind up on this, personally I don't need the headaches if anything where to come of it.

Rob

 

[Vicstar]

Cool thanks for the reponses.

I guess what I would like to see is a clearly defined set of rules from the body administering the policy. Maybe I'm on my own here, but I couldn't afford to invest $5000:

a) for a name only to have it stripped.
b) and then have fork out cash to fight a legal battle to defend it.

Obvious answer is, "Timmy, you answered your own question so shut up and just don't bid on this one".

BUT, it's hard to weight up the risks if you don't know what the REAL risks are.

Hey Tim, like Simon said, it's a complaints driven process... so it's taken on a case-by-case basis only if a complaint is submitted. With that being said, I always undertake my own prompt investigations prior to bidding on any domain, no matter the amount.. and only bid after clearly analysing the outcome of my results.

This questioning of current owner status & rights is completely legitimate - and I imagine these concerns would effect a large majority of organisations associated with dropped domains since day zip (BOTH teams! )

In response to the research some of you have done on "Calculators".. the recent "Caravan Parks" drop we know so well was previously owned by a business first registered in 1998 with "Caravan Parks" in the title (and still operating today - infact only recently renewed their business name).

Oh - and another business that has Caravan Parks in their title (Biz regd 2002) also has a related TRADEMARK.

Now that's what i call Risky

 

[ant]

In response to the research some of you have done on "Calculators".. the recent "Caravan Parks" drop we know so well was previously owned by a business first registered in 1998 with "Caravan Parks" in the title (and still operating today - infact only recently renewed their business name).

Oh - and another business that has Caravan Parks in their title (Biz regd 2002) also has a related TRADEMARK.

Can you elaborate on your findings, I have an old whois for caravanparks.com.au, it used to be licensed to VIC BN 1385693R.

ASIC is not showing a registration date for this Business Number.

I don't check trademarks very often so I tried using Spacey's link
http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/trademarks/index.shtml
and could not find anything relating to "caravan parks" or "caravanparks"

 

[Vicstar]

Can you elaborate on your findings, I have an old whois for caravanparks.com.au, it used to be licensed to VIC BN 1385693R.

ASIC is not showing a registration date for this Business Number.

I don't check trademarks very often so I tried using Spacey's link
http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/trademarks/index.shtml
and could not find anything relating to "caravan parks" or "caravanparks"

Hiya Ant, I use:
http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/trademarks/search_index.shtml
click ATMOSS ~ enter as a GUEST if you don't have a logon.
Type the separate words in the 2 fields (there's an art in searching.. in this case singular will give you a wider result), then Search.
Remember when you're finished to End Session (link on the LHS).

As for the Biz reg, head to VIC Consumer Affairs (see 2nd link)
https://online.justice.vic.gov.au/cav/br-home
You wont find them by typing in their biz name (CA search system finicky especially with blended/merged & hyphenated words). Type in the Biz Reg number (REMOVE ALL SPACES).

 

[highnfar]

so... how much was the winning bid on this drop?

 

[Chris.C]

so... how much was the winning bid on this drop?

Calculator.com.au - $6509.
Calculators.com.au - $5001

 

[Shane]

I'm not sure that these would be as risky as people are making out. The word "calculator" and its plural are about as generic as you can get, and although the previous owner used the company name Calculators Pty Ltd it doesn't appear that they were actively using this as their public name

Having a particular company or business name provides you with little protection in the wider business world. It's a trademark that you need, and as someone who's going through the trademark process for my own business, I can guarantee that the word "calculators" on its own could never be registered as a trademark in a million years.

If you could risk the $6k or so purchase price, I reckon either of these names would have been worth the bet.

We'll have to keep an eye on the whois, and see how long the new owner's name stays on there.

 

[DavidL]

There is next to no risk in registering these domain names.

Contrary to popular opinion, there is no auDA policy that says you can't register domains that are trademarks or company names.

Say Microsoft hadn't registered microsoft.com.au. If you wanted to go and register it right now you could. And according to auDA policy, as long as you satisfy elligibilty criteria you are not only allowed to but have as much right as Microsoft to do so!

There is only one way you can fall foul of auDA policy registering such a name and that is if you monetise it. http://www.auda.org.au/policies/auda-2008-10/

What is more relevant in the Microsoft example is that they would come after you via the auDRP process. This costs the complainant $2K and for them to win it, it usually boils down to them having to prove 'bad faith' against the registrant. Generally trading off the good will or reputation of the brand owner.

Obviously Microsoft being who they are, this would probably be pretty easy to prove. Why would a registrant register such a sequence of letters if they didn't see value in these letters matching Microsoft's brand?

However you register CaravanParks.com.au or Calculators.com.au - for the previous owner (TM holder) to come back and prove you had registered the domain to trade off their TM rather than the inherent generic value in the name is nigh on impossible.

I'm not advocating charging out and registering possible TM violating names. I'm just saying don't worry so much everyone! Do the right thing, act in good faith and you'll be right

 

[DomainNames]

Net fleet is 100% correct. Dont be so worried by the untrue myths of domain names. Lawyers would like you to believe trademarks, business names etc are more powerful but under the Internet they are not.

Just make sure whatever you register is "GENERIC WORDS" or some word you made up yourself etc

FYI "microsoft Corporation" is not the only company in the world called microsoft!

I laugh when I see big companies claim generic words as trademarks. Usually its lawyers pushing the boundries of legality over the edge

How about Optus trying to trademark the word " yes" and Cadberry losing in its fight against Darryl lea chocolate over the colour purple!

Once lawyers get involved you will see crazy claims of "ownership" and "rights" . Dont let them scare you. use the internet and fellow domainers to keep your valuable domain name assets.


have a look at what Microsoft claims as trademarks

http://www.microsoft.com/About/Legal/EN/US/IntellectualProperty/Trademarks/EN-US.aspx

 

[snoopy]

My gut feeling is that the chance of these two names being lost is minimal. I just can't see AUDA arguing that they match existing company names when you consider the genericness of the terms.

 

[Timmy]

There is only one way you can fall foul of auDA policy registering such a name and that is if you monetise it. http://www.auda.org.au/policies/auda-2008-10/

Can't say I'd want to invest $11k for Calculator/s.com.au and not be allowed to monetize them?

Isn't that the whole point?

 

[DavidL]

Can't say I'd want to invest $11k for Calculator/s.com.au and not be allowed to monetize them?

Isn't that the whole point?

By monetise I (well the policy) means a straight parked page - full of ads and pretty much nothing else. But you do raise a good point that is currently under discussion at the Names Policy Panel at the moment.

When does a monetised website become an advertising supported website?

Eg where would you draw the line with the following websites:

www.newcastleweather.com.au
www.windfarms.com.au
www.hobart.com.au
www.smh.com.au

Personally I think this is a grey area that should be 'black and whited' by not having special rules for monetised websites. Then you don't even have to worry about defining a monetised website.

With Calculators.com.au, I'd assume that most people after spending $11K would move straight onto developing them so this wouldn't apply.

 

[DomainNames]

You are allowed to monetize them or develop them but even if the new registrant sits on them there is no auda policy time limit when a site must be built or monetised.

I wouldnt pay $11k thinking I could buy it and resell it undeveloped but. Thats a massive risk. Offering it back to the previous owner later is also a mistake so that should never be considered.

Things to note are keep copies of all communications if somone wants your name. These come in very handy if it goes to arbitration or court later!

You might get anon people offering to buy it. later you might be surpised it was the complainant using staff or anon details to set you up or scout you out on your intentions for registration

I suggest this new owner of calculator monetise it asap with Sedo and tick the NOT FOR SALE box. Develop it later or sit on it for 6 months at least before ticking the sell button on Sedo or wherever you monetise.

( from the whois I have a feeling this new registrant knows Policy and what to do for maximise their investment on these ones )