Is this Cybersquatting?

[Biggie]

Asking readers their opinion is "Shit"? You know whats really "Shit"? the way you and others in the domain industry condone Cyber Squatting, We have no problem poking fun at unknown domainers who register obvious TM's but when someone like MM with "da bomb" in domain sales does it, we do one of three things; Make excuses for it, Justify it or attack the messenger who brings it to our attention, kinda of like what your doing here.

And I made NO insinuations here, I will directly say that "Cybersquatting" which is what this clearly is, IS in FACT unethical.




Don't we have a subforum with catchy thread titles that sends traffic to a blog each and every day? Go pick on him.

Not that is was my intent, If I'm going to send traffic to a blog, it's going to be my own :yes:

Raider, you know i love you....well, at least i love the look that your avatar conjures in my mind.


asking us our opinion on a domain, none of us own....without attaching it to the owner is one thing

to do it by setting a predisposition towards one side or the other by using the title , "is this cybersquatting", is much different.

now, if we break the domain down, imo it could be seen two ways.



google microsoft, can be seen as "verb noun", where google (verb) is an action that takes place to locate microsoft (noun), as in googling something.

in that respect, the domain would be seen as promoting ms, via the use google

kinda similar to those old yahoo commercials, when they used to say yahoo this, yahoo that.

the other viewpoint is where both are nouns and neither company would have more legal right than the other, to lay claim to it.

in that respect, the domain sits in the middle of the road and both companies would probably have to file class action to delete and prohibit further use or registration of the domain.


as is, i think most who see the domain, may lean towards the verb/noun perspective and if so, it's a no harm no foul situation because both would benefit from the search.

imo....


to your other points about "poking fun at unknown domainers who register TM's"

if you read that, that is the point.

when you make the "domainer known" who owns the TM, then it's different and it ain't poking fun no more.


as for the sub forum with the catchy titles, you've picked on somebody and you may feel i picked on you, now you want me to go pick on him?


well, i'm kinda picky, so how bout i pick you up later.

 

[Johnn]

Raider, you know i love you.




well, i'm kinda picky, so how bout i pick you up later.

Sexual harassment!

 

[Raider]

Make excuses for it, Justify it or attack the messenger who brings it to our attention, kinda of like what your doing here.

The latter didn't work so now he does all three.

I think we all met someone at one time or another who referred to domainers as cybersquatters, not knowing were investors ourselves.. It's a label I don't think we'll ever be able to erase, not as long as people like yourself keep making excuses for it.

 

[chipmeade]

In all the confusion my carefully crafted clever response was lost in the back and forth banter. Damn!

 

[Raider]

Even if you could successfully make the argument that GoogleMicrosoft.com is two different companies or accept Biggies ridiculous argument that it's a "verb noun", and therefore not a TM infringement, what about the 100 or so other Trademarked domains that are far more obvious than this one is?.

If you go to Mann's web site: www.domainmarket.com/ simply type in any famous trademark in the seach box, Google, Twitter, Microsoft, YouTube, Sony, Samsung, American Idol, Beatles, the list is endless, and then come back and tell us how we should "ignore it and let them whither in the wind"

 

[katherine]

Mike Mann’s Domain Asset Holdings Loses 21 Facebook Domains In One UDRP
Another WIPO lost stupidly. Personally I think domainers should avoid losing a WIPO at all cost, because the next time one is filed against you, your history as a losing respondent will weigh in the balance.
Also it weakens your position and makes you more vulnerable to domain predators.

 

[urlurl]

that is true, but those names are kind of obvious TM conflicts

 

[sitemaker]

they would never merge. Think about the "branding" issues... GoSoft.com would simply NOT work with the male audience, nor would GoMicro.com for that matter... MicroGoo.com could work with the kiddie geeks but surely that is not a large enough group worth the merger hassle.

So if I get migo.com and gomi.com, will the Microsoft-Google Combine come after me in a reverse-cybersquatting action?

Seriously tho', when I first saw the beginning of the thread, I figured the only sense of the domain name was as an imperative sentence, verb-noun. As such, I couldn't see any use/value for it. HateMicrosoft.com might get some traffic, but GoogleMicrosoft???

BTW, I should come clean:

I have owned (without shame):

MicrosoftSpecialist.com which it seems to me may have a fair use for any certified microsoft specialist;

If I can put certified microsoft specialist on my resume or business card, am I able to make it my website or own and redirect to my website?

also owned (but with some concern):
SheratonHotel.info
Is this OK for any Sheraton franchise owner to own and use, or only for the main corp?
If a hundred different SHeraton franchise owners would be allowed to buy and use it, can any single one take it away from any non-owner, like me? Would I get to choose which one to award it to?
Or is SheratonHotel.info, because of the "info" TLD, fair use for publishing reviews of guest experiences?

Also, I have a few celebrity/sport domains, used for tribute sites, like ChuckConners.com, RonGuidry.com, etc. (Some with widgets for Ebay memorabilia auctions).

This sort of stuff is not my main line at all, but I do have a few. In two cases I have written first to ask "Do you care? Shall I push it to you?" I never received a response, but I've saved the letters and proof of delivery.

And what about ChevyDealer.net (see my sig)?

And what about CanonCameraBatteries.com ? Nobody buys from Canon the batteries for their Canon Camera!

Where does one draw the line?

--- J.

 

[Theo]

It's a label I don't think we'll ever be able to erase, not as long as people like yourself keep making excuses for it.

Then feel free to donate your domain TombRaider.net to the trademark holders. http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=75085273&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch

 

[sitemaker]

Theo, that's sort of what I've done; I wrote to the celebrities to offer to donate it to them, and they did not respond. That "tacit permission" would never stand up in court, and I'd certainly push it to them if they ever wanted it, but I'm confident that the good faith shown up front would make anything super nasty unlikely to happen later.

Also note that I never use these domains in any way that they would deem oppositional to their good reputation. A fan site is not a fly in their ointment like a badmouthing site would be; so even if they later wanted it because they'd decided they had a better use for the domain (or because they want absolute control over uses of their "brand"), they are unlikely to want to "make an example" of a fan. They would just ask for, and receive, the domain.

Legal wondering regarding business trademark domains:

Does it matter if more than one party is legally entitled to use the trademark, despite these parties competing with each other? I mean that there would be multiple qualified sales prospects for the domain. (But let's suppose you are not among the trademark users, and you own the domain.)

For example, in different geographical areas, there are many unrelated brick-and-mortar carpet retailers named Carpetville, but only one can have Carpetville.com. (Another uses CarpetvilleInc.com, etc. etc.) They all own longstanding trademark rights to "Carpetville" in their non-competing geographies.

Ditto for SilverLakeLiquors.com (and probably for very many other business names)

If I owned Carpetville.com or SilverLakeLiquors.com, can any one of the businesses using those trademarks take it away for nothing?

What if my own business plan were to launch such a business, but plans are put off, or change, such that I now want to sell the domain?

(BTW, I do not own those domains, but two of my web development clients do own those trademarks. I helped one get their ideal dot-com domain, which had been in legitimate use by a different holder of the same trademark in another state; and my other client is still stuck with the ...Inc.com ending.)

 

[katherine]

On a side note, the WIPO I mentioned above is two years old, so it's a rehash of old news actually
But it doesn't seem to have triggered a 'cleanup' effect.

 

[Theo]

My point is that when the OP raises the issue of cybersquatting, all while they own tm violations, that's quite hypocritical.
For more info read http://www.dnforum.com/f73/tomb-raider-domain-thread-178955.html

 

[katherine]

Mike Mann’s Domain Asset Holdings Loses UDRP On universalassistance.com

...

Furthermore, any doubt in the minds of the Panel as to the motives of the Respondent in registering the Disputed Domain Name is dispelled by the fact that the Complainant puts forward evidence of the Respondent’s pattern of registering domain names that involve trade marks, companies or businesses of other well-known third parties. The Respondent was involved in several disputed domain name disputes including the following: Training Channel, S.A v. Domain Asset Holdings, WIPO Case No. D2011-0875; Lifetime Assistance, Inc. v. Domain Asset Holdings, LLC, WIPO Case No. D2011-2137 ; and Facebook, Inc. v. Domain Asset Holdings, WIPO Case No. D2011-0516.

Previous UDRP panels have found against the Respondent for all of the above-listed domains for reasons similar to those already discussed by this Panel.

...

 

[Raider]

On a side note, the WIPO I mentioned above is two years old, so it's a rehash of old news actually
But it doesn't seem to have triggered a 'cleanup' effect.

This goes to the point I made earlier, 2 years of being put on notice and he's done nothing clean up his act.. It's in your face Cybersquatting.

I doub't that Mann cares.... What I find confusing is the money he's earning from the domains by selling them cant be a lot, considering the TM holder can WIPO the name for less.

Mike Mann’s Domain Asset Holdings Loses UDRP On universalassistance.com

Do you know if Michael Mann went before the panel and said" “we have 150,000 names many of which a machine registered.” ?

LMAO.

 

[Theo]

Why do you still own Tombraider.net ?

 

[Biggie]

Even if you could successfully make the argument that GoogleMicrosoft.com is two different companies or accept Biggies ridiculous argument that it's a "verb noun", and therefore not a TM infringement, what about the 100 or so other Trademarked domains that are far more obvious than this one is?.

because you can't accept an argument, you call it ridiculous

you can only invalidate an argument by analysing the premises and there are no fallacies in mine.

i never said, therefore it's not tm infringement


i said, it's a no harm no foul situation as, who would have the rights to enforce a claim over the other? google or microsoft

 

[Raider]

I'll ask again Biggie, What about the hundreds or more other Trademarked domains that are far more obvious than this one?

A couple months ago I was researching a hospice, and low and behold I come across this site;

http://mayoHospice.com

Cybersquatting on the Mayo Clinic?



And to the troll who doesn't know the difference between "Tomb Raider" in a Archeology sense to that of a Video Game, I suggest you go back to the 4th grade, Here in the United States we teach that here.

 

[Theo]

And to the troll who doesn't know the difference between "Tomb Raider" in a Archeology sense to that of a Video Game, I suggest you go back to the 4th grade, Here in the United States we teach that here.

"We teach that" - from my understanding, you only finished high school in Calapan, so you're not qualified to teach anything.

Let me point you to the "Tomb Raider" trademark, registered in 1996.

 

[Raider]

Hmm, Last I remember those names were registered by a Greek, and dropped by a Filipino.

TombRaider Registered to a Greek as well.. Maybe it's a Greek thing.

Trashing your fellow man Theo?

 

[Theo]

Hmm, Last I remember those names were registered by a Greek, and dropped by a Filipino.

TombRaider Registered to a Greek as well.. Maybe it's a Greek thing.

Trashing your fellow man Theo?

Are you referring to your Greek husband, Nicholas? He looks like a nice dude. Does he know how much you're trashing his home country?