Few names I've been sitting on for years, interesting in hearing your thoughts
- Thread starter DamianLondon
- Start date
Data Glasses
Top Contributor
All the names are great quality and of high value
Hi Ned and fellow domainers...
just wanted to clarify on the above.
I have a generic word domain, and had recently contacted a business which was selling that particular product (generic product, not by brand) to see if they would be interested in some sort of affiliate agreement, for me to send them traffic. Or could potentially sell the domain to them if they are keen.
The owner said I was cybersquatting and it is illegal, and said he will get back to me.
Just wondering if there is any case for him to get AUDA involved to force giving up the domain.
And what is the best practice on our end to protect ourselves on this.
many thanks!
@sydneyduo
For most ccTLDs (of course not .au) its not a problem to get the fingers on domains for the sole intention of selling them afterwards, at least not for the registries(for lawyers you act allways in bad faith, and they usually try to get the domain + money from you), but if you contact companies the way you did, then you gave them a really good reason of getting the domain from you, start an dispute and blame you for bad-faith. In worst case you loose the generic domain and you get charged for the dispute itself, depending on the ccTLD/registry of course.
It would be strange if direct offers to companies are no problem in Australia.
Cheers
Last edited:
neddy
Top Contributor
Without knowing the exact domain you are talking about, I make this general comment.
I don't know what you are concerned about!
As an example, let's say you own Heaters.com.au. That's a generic word. You bought it with the intention of one day perhaps developing it, but circumstances have changed, and you'd now like to sell it.
So you approach a lot of companies that sell "heaters" and offer it for sale.
That is perfectly legitimate, and no way imho that any complainant would even get to first base.
FirstPageResults
Top Contributor
neddy
Top Contributor
Markus, I respectfully disagree based on my previous response to sydneyduo.
And in Australia, we have different dispute settling procedures (at least initially) compared to other jurisdictions. It costs the holder of the domain nothing to defend an initial complaint through auDA.
If the complainant goes down the auDRP / WIPO path, it also costs the respondent nothing unless they engage legal assistance or choose to have a 3 member panel.
Ned, sorry, I was not clear enough. Sure, holder of .au domains have nothing to loose except the domain itself as far as I see(just talking about generic domains), which is bad enough anyway. But take as example TLD.be, if you catch a dispute through the registry DNS.be and you loose, they will charge the old owner the costs for the panel.
Anyway, I just wanted to say; if you offer generic domains to a company, you might be open for attack and companies/lawyers can use this against you, just to get the domain on a cheaper way.
I don't agree either - can you descrivbe precisely HOW a company can use it against you (a generic domain that is).
Remember in a WIPO, the complainnat must prove ALL three of the following:
(http://www.icann.org/en/help/dndr/udrp/policy)
I don't see how approaching end-users with a generic domain can assist in proving any of those three items.
Bacon Farmer
Top Contributor
Just for a bit of colour the auDRP results involving a "generic" keyword domain show overwhelmingly that the respondent keeps the domain. Of the 26 cases only 3 went with the complainant.
neddy
Top Contributor
Hi guys
Thanks heaps for your replies and also to Bacon Farmer with this findings.
This has reinforced my initial thoughts that as long as it is not infringing on a trademarked name, we should be fine
Thanks once again
Like I said before, this might be different in Australia. I do not have experiance with Australian disputes at all.
Currently I defend a case were lawyer try to throw dirt to win a case, blame me bad-faith in offering the domain to them what never happened, just to impress the panel or whatever.
Anyway, they can blame you bad-faith and take your domainoffer as evidence that you purchased a domain just for the sole intention to sell it afterwards to this certain company.
Thats also the reason why I never ever would offer a domain direct to an company, at least not by my self and not without the needed money to defend the domain which can be quite expensive.
In a current case of mine a huge patent & trademark company offerd my broker EUR 50 for a nice generic key (I suppose they lost this unused customer-domain last year through stupidity). They told my broker, if I dont accept EUR 50, they will take it through an dispute which is no problem for them, whis would be anyway cheaper for them becasue they can deduct it from the tax. A clear sink or swim offer.
Some Laywers/Companies know no boundaries and will stop at nothing to get their finger as cheap as possible on wanted domains, they use intimidation and false assertions or whatever. This might also come to Australia sooner or later, even if the auDA pilicy is very different.
That was icann I quoted so international.
They are just trying to intimidate you. There's no substance to their claim
You´re right, I can just agree. But under some ccTLDs or their countries, the registration of domainnames just as investment has never been discussed/rated in a dispute decision so far, even if its allowed by registry.
