amilo.com

[dvdrip]

I saw that buydomains lost amilo.com today.
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2008/d2008-0828.html

I also see that the domain is still showing BD as the owner.

You might say that the domain is in a legal duspute but DB offered the name to the Complainant and did not file a proper response.

Does this mean that the Complainant is slow at making the transfer or ...?

 

[Theo]

It's clear that the Respodent filed a response:

"Rather, while denying that it has registered and used the domain name in bad faith, the Respondent consents to the transfer of the domain name to the Complainant."

and:

" (1) the Response submitted by the Respondent was prepared by its Vice President and General Counsel;"

 

[domaingenius]

So guess that the Respondent was trying to stop having a decision made against them, but a decision WAS made against them.No doubt that will be referred to against them in future, given the number of domains they own.

DG

 

[Theo]

I don't think this was the first time BD had a UDRP served. Statistically speaking, given the number of domains they own it could not be otherwise.

 

[dvdrip]

It's clear that the Respodent filed a response:

"Rather, while denying that it has registered and used the domain name in bad faith, the Respondent consents to the transfer of the domain name to the Complainant."

and:

" (1) the Response submitted by the Respondent was prepared by its Vice President and General Counsel;"

Theo I said "proper" response.

Saying "You can have the domain" is hardly a response.

So guess that the Respondent was trying to stop having a decision made against them, but a decision WAS made against them.No doubt that will be referred to against them in future, given the number of domains they own.

DG

It doesn't really matter. They have lost AND won in the past.
Most panelists base their decision on facts of each individual case.

 

[Theo]

Why is it hardly a response, when it was filed after the UDRP? It's not a private exchange, it's a technical surrender of the domain that has been recorded as part of the UDRP.

 

[EnricoSchaefer]

Some Complainants take a long time to process the transfer. Some registrars make it more difficult than necessary or are otherwise not as responsive as required. In any event, looks like complainant was motivated to file, but not to transfer.

 

[jberryhill]

It's not allowed to be transferred yet:

Folks, the UDRP is written in pretty simple language.

Paragraph 4(k):

" If an Administrative Panel decides that your domain name registration should be canceled or transferred, we will wait ten (10) business days (as observed in the location of our principal office) after we are informed by the applicable Provider of the Administrative Panel's decision before implementing that decision. "

The registrar is not even permitted to transfer the domain name until the eleventh business day after notification of a decision. The decision is dated August 5, and was likely sent out by WIPO a few days after that (there is a delay between the Panel reporting the decision and WIPO formatting it for notification to the parties and the registrar).

There is no mystery here.

And, yes, a stipulated transfer is a "response". Typically, panels don't bother with the analysis in those situations, though.

And, no, if you read the decision, there is no finding of "bad faith" or "lack of legitimate interest". Instead, the panel acknowledges the stipulation to transfer, and transfers the name.

 

[dvdrip]

You are right. I forgot about the 10 day window.

Hmmm, I wonder if this "response" intends to do exactly what you say. Avoid a finding of "bad faith" or "lack of legitimate interest". If this is the case then I would consider it as a response.

 

[Theo]

Since there is no rating system for people taken to WIPO over domains they held, I doubt this response serves any purpose, other than to close the case.

 

[jberryhill]

Hmmm, I wonder if this "response" intends to do exactly what you say.

Have you ever gotten a speeding ticket in some faraway place?

I was driving through a town in Wisconsin, when I got nailed for doing 45 in a 35 zone (which was just around the bend from a stretch of 50 MPH highway). The choices were:

1. Pay $X on the spot with no admission of a violation.

2. Come back 30 days later for a trial and, if convicted, pay $X+Y and be found to have committed a violation.

Some claims and names aren't worth the bother. Both WIPO and NAF have procedures by which the parties can suspend the proceeding and get the name transferred, but quite often one or the other party finds the process confusing, and says, "Oh, just let the panel transfer it."

What the decision demonstrates is that BuyDomains responds rationally to UDRP claims in situations where the claim is not worth defending. A record of stating "please transfer the domain name" hardly demonstrates cybersquatting.

(and, yes, that speeding ticket, along with any other citation or dispute from age 16 on, was noted on my bar application)