hsbc.us.com

[elieli]

Thank you for all the people who responded in this thread.
I found a solution.
I will close this thread now.
Thank you

 

[jberryhill]

I definitely did not know who is hsbc.com,

One of the largest international commercial banks on the planet.

I do not compete with them and I do not "divert their traffic" as they claim.

And you get paid for links going to.... what, exactly?

furthermore hsbc can mean 3 different things not connected to this company

And you were using the domain name for exactly which of those 3 things?

That argument always makes me picture a bank robber saying, "But the First Amendment permits me to sit in my house, wear a mask, point a gun, and say 'Give me all your money.'"

Yes, it does.

But doing it in a bank is another matter.

So, what difference does it make if there are 3 different things that HSBC could mean, if you weren't doing any of those things?

 

[elieli]

Thank you for your response.
according to what you say the owner of hnn.net (sold in other part of this forum) is not allowed to have the name unless he has a company named "Henry's new napkins" for example, I am sure that hnn is a trademark somewhere in the world.
where do you put the border? 3 letters are o.k and 4 are not o.k?
also, you disregarded my second point, suppose I get hsbc.geocities.com,
can they sue me also for this?

 

[jberryhill]

according to what you say the owner of hnn.net (sold in other part of this forum) is not allowed to have the name unless he has a company named "Henry's new napkins" for example

No, that is not what I am saying. The merits of each of these things needs to be considered in view of the individual facts and circumstances.

For example, the defense of pwc.com against Price Waterhouse Coopers was successful because the registrant of that domain name was actually using the domain name for PPC links to vendors of personal watercraft and equipment, commonly known as PWC's. But using HSBC in a PPC program which includes financial service links is a no-brainer losing situation. On top of that, while there may indeed be someone who has trademark rights in "HNN" for some specific goods and services, HSBC is huge and very well known - plus, if you are in the US (since it is a .us name) and HSBC has registered TM rights in the US, then you are on constructive notice, by law, of their trademark rights whether you personally have heard of them or not.

It's not as simple as "they have a trademark - you lose", and that is not what I said.

But I do have a visceral reaction to the common pattern of someone saying "the domain name COULD be used for X, Y, or Z" as a defense, when they are not doing X, Y, or Z. I mean, crikey, I can shoot someone on the street because they COULD be a murderer coming to get me, and I would be acting legally in self defense. But if that is just not the situation, then the "hypothetical defense" argument that so often gets trotted out here does not impress me.

Don't take it personally. You simply provided a convenient opportunity to make that point clearly.

 

[Anthony Ng]

Didn't know that they are going after sub-domains, but should they be simply contacting Central NIC instead?

 

[fab]

Quote:
I do not compete with them and I do not "divert their traffic" as they claim.



And you get paid for links going to.... what, exactly?

Well all typos are taking traffic aren't they. Why are they allowed?

 

[Majnoon]

best thing to do is try to get some cash in return of letting it go. You never know they might give u something

 

[DNQuest.com]

Quote:
I do not compete with them and I do not "divert their traffic" as they claim.



And you get paid for links going to.... what, exactly?

Well all typos are taking traffic aren't they. Why are they allowed?

Actually, many typos have been challenged and successfully recovered by the claimants. Just becasue you don't get caught doesn't mean it's legal or ok to do.



John, I really liked how you presented the "could be" defense. Would I be infringing if I used your example in the future :wink: Wait, that would be a copyright arguement.

 

[jberryhill]

Didn't know that they are going after sub-domains, but should they be simply contacting Central NIC instead?

Central NIC submits their 3LD registrations to the UDRP.

 

[hugegrowth]

Actually, many typos have been challenged and successfully recovered by the claimants. Just becasue you don't get caught doesn't mean it's legal or ok to do.

What about typos of generic words that are used as websites?

For example, business.com and bsuiness.com

How can someone trademark a generic word?

 

[jberryhill]

What about typos of generic words that are used as websites?

http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/2001/d2001-0764.html

 

[fab]

John, what do you have to say about this http://www.dnforum.com/f5/minicilp-com-overture-tld-1877-a-110852.html

 

[elieli]

So this person is selling minicilp.com for a price of about 3 years investment.
hsbc.us.com has 100-200 typeins per day, making over $120 per month.
so it's price in the market should be $4320, I should have sold it a week after I got it

 

[fab]

this person is "DCG"

 

[hugegrowth]

http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/2001/d2001-0764.html

I liked the decision on that. Interesting that the company was
also using a misspelling of a generic word in their advertising too!

 

[jberryhill]

John, what do you have to say about this

It looks like a thread where someone is selling a domain name.

I sometimes get email like this. "Hey John, can you tell me what you think of [some URL]" from people whose first names I don't even know, as if I sit around all day doing hours of research on stuff for anonymous inquirers.

"MINICLIP" was refused registration as a trademark on the Principal Register.

 

[fatter]

I think a 4 letter abbreviation crosses a threashold that identifies individual companies much more than a 3 letter combo which could mean pratically anything of course a well known 3 letter like IBM, unless you own a well established business with history it might be tough to win udrp

 

[fab]

I just found this:
http://www.nominet.org.uk/ReferenceDocuments/CaseLaw/OneInAMillionJudgment.html

which seems to directly relate to our discussion, although the court case is in the UK.

 

[Whois-Search]

Say they can have it for $2000 (lower than their fees would be) and put an Intellectual property disclaimer (say we only sell generic names) on the bottom of the email.

Also don't link to anything the "Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank Corporation" sells which you are doing at the moment.

 

[Shaggy]

Anything new happend yet with this name and the bank?