Godaddy.com threatening me

[vacbob]

you are correct, i also own dodad.org i guess noone has ever heard of a dodad

 

[Anthony Ng]

>>options: "Dodaddy" is a recognized word in common language. I am not sure about the reason for its registration but personaly don't think any phrase ending with "daddy" should be associated with godaddy.com. That would be nonsense.

Just like when eBay is going after all *bay.com, we all know that it's nonsense; but unless you have the resources (a.k.a. money and time) to fight them, reason loses.

 

[Ari Goldberger]

I'm not commenting on the specific facts here but here's a rule I would suggest. Ask yourself if the value of a domain name is based primarily because of its value to a party with a trademark, as opposed to it being a common word or term. If that is the case, and you don't have a viable fair use argument (fan site, criticism, sale of company's product, etc.), then seeking exorbitant sums from that party is arguably not a good thing to do.

 

[pljones]

Ari- I like your easy-to-understand rule of thumb. If everyone followed that suggestion then there would not be nearly as many domain name problems.

 

[Dominata]

I checked on the trademark date it is September 19, 2000
I purchased dodaddy.com in april of 2000.

First Use in Commerce Date: 1999-04-19

 

[timechange.com]

I'd rather 'do' mommy; especially the MILF type

Bottom line is, if you plan to use your resources and money to defend it, go for it.

 

[flipsix]

You shouldnt have said that they could purchase it. But you can always claim that move was made in jest.

One way out of this is to do the following, set up a website for DoDaddy and use it to promote a product or service that has absolutely nothing to do with GoDaddy. For example, a cartoon character called "DoDaddy".

The reason for this is a trademark is classed based, in order for them to prove their point they basically have to show that your product could be confused with theirs.

Its been done before against such notable giants as IBM, so give it a try, at this point youve really got nothing to loose.

Alicia

 

[Ari Goldberger]

>Its been done before against such notable giants as IBM, so give it a try, at this point youve really got nothing to loose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not exactly correct. First, there are lots of headaches involved in having to defend an action if they come after you. You might consider your time better spent in other endeavours. Second, they could sue under the Federal Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protect Act (ACCPA) which carries potential penalties of up to $100k. Once they file, the action does not necessarily go away just because you might decide to cave. They might want you to also pay money to settle. Third, it is not only infringement that is at issue, in addition to ACCPA which is not about infringement, there is also the Federal Dilution Act, which provides for actions by holders of "famous" marks, notwithstanding the lack of likelihood of consumer confusion.

There are few who are more ardent protectors of the rights of domain owners. However, having defended numerous such cases, I also have experience with those who waste their time defending actions for which they have little chance of prevailing over domain names which have very little intrinsic value, except for the fact of its perceived value to a sole trademark holder.

 

[charles]

Originally posted by sharpboy
I never understand how these discussions can occur in an open forum, with such details.

Wouldn't this have been better:

I received a letter from ***.com that my domain ***/.com is an infringement on their name and want me to C&D. Can they do this? I sent them an e-mail telling them they can purchase ***.com for a lot of $$$. what else should i do?

Do you not think that someone from godaddy or any other concerned company has a user name(s) on this forum?

My sentiments exactly.

Also remember, you can always appeal a UDRP action with an ACPA lawsuit. So an unfavorable UDRP decision isn't the end of the road.

 

[flipsix]

Im guessing you're a lawyer.

Well at any rate, Ive done what Ive suggested before and have bested beasts like IBM. So hiring a high priced legal team isnt the only way to go about it.

Originally posted by Ari Goldberger
>Its been done before against such notable giants as IBM, so give it a try, at this point youve really got nothing to loose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not exactly correct. First, there are lots of headaches involved in having to defend an action if they come after you. You might consider your time better spent in other endeavours. Second, they could sue under the Federal Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protect Act (ACCPA) which carries potential penalties of up to $100k. Once they file, the action does not necessarily go away just because you might decide to cave. They might want you to also pay money to settle. Third, it is not only infringement that is at issue, in addition to ACCPA which is not about infringement, there is also the Federal Dilution Act, which provides for actions by holders of "famous" marks, notwithstanding the lack of likelihood of consumer confusion.

There are few who are more ardent protectors of the rights of domain owners. However, having defended numerous such cases, I also have experience with those who waste their time defending actions for which they have little chance of prevailing over domain names which have very little intrinsic value, except for the fact of its perceived value to a sole trademark holder.

 

[charles]

Originally posted by flipsix
Well at any rate, Ive done what Ive suggested before and have bested beasts like IBM. So hiring a high priced legal team isnt the only way to go about it.

I'm curious (not doubting). Can you tell us how you kicked IBM's corpus? Just one little story please, from the dawn of the Internet era?

Generally, I have to agree with Isaac here, that it's easy to blow a lotta cash in defending names not worth the hassle. And so many legal strategies like "put up a site that uses DoDaddy.com in a non-infringing fashion" cut no ice with the courts when they are adopted after the fact (and after an exhorbitant price-demand). You just end up chasing your tail and losing in the end.

So back to IBM. Whadja get?

 

[charles]

Originally posted by flipsix
Well at any rate, Ive done what Ive suggested before and have bested beasts like IBM. So hiring a high priced legal team isnt the only way to go about it.

I'm curious (not doubting). Can you tell us how you kicked IBM's corpus? Just one little story please, from the dawn of the Internet era?

Generally, I have to agree with Isaac here, that it's easy to blow a lotta cash in defending names not worth the hassle. And so many legal strategies like "put up a site that uses DoDaddy.com in a non-infringing fashion" cut no ice with the courts when they are adopted after the fact (and after an exhorbitant price-demand). You just end up chasing your tail and losing in the end.

So back to IBM. Whadja get?

 

[Ari Goldberger]

Im guessing you're a lawyer.

Well at any rate, Ive done what Ive suggested before and have bested beasts like IBM. So hiring a high priced legal team isnt the only way to go about it.
-----------------------------------
Your guess is right. The LAST thing I'm suggesting is hiring a legal team (high priced or not). I'm only suggesting that your suggestion that there's nothing to lose in these affairs is not necessarily true. The benefit of holding on to a domain name that may not have much intrinsic value should be weighed against the risks -- even if their probability of occurence is low.