Microsoft seeks $100,000 per domain name

[TheLegendaryJP]

Gentlemen! Yes I mean gentlemen.

Personal attack is not allowed here and just a reminder that we do have PM just in case you want to keep it private.

Opinion always is and will be opinion - No one is right or wrong.

Thank you for your cooperation.

This is not a warning - just a reminder.

Thanks again,
John

Im sorry John but enough is enough, I will not tolerate such vicious attacks nor should it even be allowed. There should be action far above just a warning let alone not even a warning, he is a reoffender, what 3-4 times he has been banned , I have lost count. He clearly shows no respect for the rules and in doing so no respect for you or any other authority. I have been extremely helpful to several members recovering at least 30 plus premium names that were stolen and continue to help others even now. I contribute quality names to the sales section and have sound advice on a variety of industry topics. I enjoy the board quite a bit and am sad to say it is slowly becoming a joke to other's for this very reason. Anyone can join, anyone can play but it must be by the rules. It is amazing at the BS that is allowed here lately. I am literally done now. Should I see a change I may start to contribute again. I will be checking my PM's for a time however and anyone who needs anything can reach me that way.

 

[Focus]

You put down others constantly and then you get put in your place and you can't take it...don't throw dirt if you don't want to get dirty Joshy. This has nothing to do with what you may (or may not) contribute to this board, this is not some all encompassing thread summing up all activity on DNF, your circular logic is at an all time high and since I have been on this forum your goal and mission has always been to get myself and others banned and when it does'nt happen you start crying like a baby. I am entitled to my opinion like anyone else here on the forum, and I disagree with you here and I don't like you very much from the constant harassment you have shown to me and others in the past here. You are not above or better than any of us JP. So get over yourself!

 

[Johnn]

This is the warning.

 

[Gerry]

Well, so much for posting newsworthy items for the viewing pleasure of others.

Johnn with two ens, you're a class act.

Ditto with Lord Brar for letting things take its natural course.

I think DontTaseMeMod.com would be suitable in this situation.

 

[taboo]

Those that make a living intentionally squatting on other peoples property for years are scumbags as Raider says, and they cost REAL domainers and the industry plenty. Selfish SOBs. It's NOT about judging people as you try to put forth, it's that REAL domainers don't like getting labled in with you squatters by the press because of your stupid actions.

Those that then cloak their identities (like your profile here on DNF), throw up fake whois details, and hide in Ping Pong land or some other piece o chit place and syphon money from the American market really should be given a hard boot. Any reason why you can't get that verified stamp? The people who stoop to pulling that crap often are the same slimeballs earning money from spyware, phishing and keylogging. The guy making less money with a "clean" business deserves more applause.

*ME being stockdoctor*

Seriously guys, stop being a scumbag and making money. Only companies with trademarks deserve big domain portfolios that are likely to tread on others marks. You all live in "ping pong land" (racist red neck translation: Thailand) and it's not fair. I live in America, which is a capitalist nation. Therefor no one else can be a capitalist except for Americans (because your countries are a piece of chit.) Obviously you are all spammers into spyware because that is the next logical step for me to think domainsponsor leads to. As smoking a marijuana cigarette leads to crack cocaine.

*END me being cockdoctor*

:yes:

 

[StockDoctor]

lol

 

[DNQuest.com]

"cybersquatting is NOT illegal or a criminal act. You cannot goto jail for it and you will not be charged with any crimes. "

My research tell me John Z went to jail....

Being illegal and going to jail are not interlinked, maybe that is what people need to say to themselves to justify their actions. But I will tell you thins, with MS coming out hard recently and as well as other big corporations, I can see a change coming where the penalties could be stiffer. And then we can thank all the coat riders of TMs for that. But currently, cybersquatting is illegal. Read the ACPA and Lanham Acts.

 

[Focus]

My research tell me John Z went to jail....

John Zuccharini (or however you spell it) was a porn pushing pervert who sent little kids to porn sites from typos who were looking for disney cartoons...please do not pull the irrelevant "John Z went to jail" card out...he is totally unrelated and not applicable here. Exposing kids to porn purposely is illegal in any decent persons moral system. Again, having and using typos and TM "infringing" domains is NOT illegal and you cannot goto jail for it with the current laws in place. YES, they can sue your ass off in civil court and it could wreak havoc for a company with damages awarded to the mark holder in a court hearing, but as far as being "against criminal laws" or facing any jail time, this is NOT the case. Ask John Berryhill :yes:

 

[Raider]

The max penalty I believe is 100K, just what Microsoft is going after.


I think we can all agree that Cybersquattting/Typosquatting is a violation of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act.

Which is in fact a domain name dispute law, intended to give trademark and service mark owners legal remedies against defendants.

 

[Focus]

yeah, good luck collecting it when the llc owner files bankruptcy and dissolves the company and starts a new one.lol

 

[katherine]

...
Again, having and using typos and TM "infringing" domains is NOT illegal and you cannot goto jail for it with the current laws in place. YES, they can sue your ass off in civil court and it could wreak havoc for a company with damages awarded to the mark holder in a court hearing, but as far as being "against criminal laws" or facing any jail time, this is NOT the case. Ask John Berryhill :yes:
...

'Not illegal' ?
On which grounds could they be suing you in the civil courts then ?

 

[Gerry]

Here's another point.

I just deleted my email from Pool for tomorrow's auctions and drops.

There were many blantant TM and typos for tomorrow. AmericanGreetingCards, AmericanMovieClassics, and perhaps another 2 dozen or so.

If I am not mistaken, nearly every TOS from every registrar has a clause in there regarding no conflicts, no TM, etc, etc.

So where does that leave these places like Pool and the other drop catchers and registrars (like TDNAM/GoDaddy) who facilitate the Sale of and the Transfer of in obvious clear violations of their own terms?

It would seem to me that all the disclaimers in the world would not suffice to cover their asses if these giants like MicroSoft and Time Warner wanted to go after them.

You can claim we are not responsible when in essence you are responsible. Claiming you are not responsible does not release you from being responsible.

yeah, good luck collecting it when the llc owner files bankruptcy and dissolves the company and starts a new one.lol

I am sure a strategy used by many. That is also a good reason to have an LLC or something to protect personal assets. Everyone is lawsuit happy. Like the agnostic in the news who sued God to prove a point about frivolous lawsuits. Problem was, he got a response!

http://www.9news.com/news/watercooler/article.aspx?storyid=77693

 

[Raider]

So where does that leave these places like Pool and the other drop catchers and registrars (like TDNAM/GoDaddy) who facilitate the Sale of and the Transfer of clear violations of their own terms?

Excellent point, Are you saying companies like American Greetings should go after Drop catchers like Pool for marketing and selling americagreetingcards.com? I would think they could if they wanted to, but this is a question best answered by JB or a Domain attorney...

I get those Pool emails too and I'm always sickened by the TM typos they advertise for their auctions, but Pool has always been a greedy drop catcher, so it's not surprising.

 

[Gerry]

Take something like AMC (american movie classics). This is owned by USA networks which is owned by Cablevision Systems Corporation who also owns American Movie Classics, Independent Film Channel, WE (Women's Entertainment). The parent company Cablevision Systems Corporation also owns these:

Clearview Cinemas
CSC Holdings, Inc.
FUSE Networks LLC
Hartford Wolf Pack
IFC Entertainment
Madison Square Garden, L.P.
New England Seawolves
New York Liberty
New York Knickerbockers
New York Rangers
Radio City Entertainment
Rainbow Media Holdings LLC

These guys are no slouches.

What I am saying is that someone like Microsoft, Time Warner, and others mentioned should not just concentrate on the holders of certain names but also those that sell certain names. Be it individuals or companies.

Many parking sites will no longer accept known TM names. Try getting anything with the letters BMW or word Olympic(s) or Olympiad(s) into Sedo.

I own Yahooisms.com. This is purely a play on words as this is a southern colloquial word. It is a dictionary word and essentially a generic. But no way can I park it anywhere. It is not a typo, it is not a TM violation, even the very word Yahoo is not a TM violation. But because Yahoo the search engine is a big as they are, they hold clout.

So perhaps a focus should be on the registars, etc. If their TOS does not permit the registering of them but yet they are registered, then who is at fault? Both, perhaps. If companies can pay for a service to alert them when their TM is registered by any registrar in the world, then those same registrars have that capability to block the registrartion. And some do! I found one the other night that did this very thing.

So now you have the big boys going after the little guy. Okay, it is what it is. But when someone like Myspace can complain to GoDaddy about seclists.org and GoDaddy pulls the plug, then why can this not be done across the board?

So if Microsoft has issues with TM, go after those that are facilitating the sale of, the registering of, and the transfer of those TM infringements.

Accessory to the crime.

Those registrars would represent a bigger bang for the buck than any of us here.

Sure, I have typos, TM names. But I don't know that I do. There are so many three letter and four letter and words in my portfolio I don't know what I have. I'd hate like hell to give any of them up and won't without some clear cut defined rulings.

Besides, a TM is just that...a trade mark. How that individual or company uses that word or words to conduct trade. Yahoo does not own the word Yahoo. MicroSoft is the very definition of itself. That would be a no brainer. Along with Google. So why mess with stuff like that.

 

[Raider]

What I am saying is that someone like Microsoft, Time Warner, and others mentioned should not just concentrate on the holders of certain names but also those that sell certain names. Be it individuals or companies.

I completely agree, they should go after the source as well, especially when selling domains that are so blatantly infringing.

I like how these Cybersquatters reg a domain, park it and then hide behind Privacy whois, Anybody here own this one?

Domain Name: AMERICAREDCROSS.COM
Registrant [6999]:
Moniker Privacy Services
20 SW 27th Ave.
Suite 201
Pompano Beach
FL
33069
US

What kind of low life targets a charity, diverting blood to their own bank account?....Like I said, Scumbags!

Word Mark AMERICAN RED CROSS
Goods and Services IC 036. US 100 101 102. G & S: Charitable fundraising. FIRST USE: 18811231. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 18811231
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 76448667
Filing Date September 11, 2002
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Published for Opposition April 29, 2003
Registration Number 2740131
Registration Date July 22, 2003
Owner (REGISTRANT) The American National Red Cross FEDERALLY CHARTERED CORPORATION UNITED STATES 430 17th St., NW Washington D.C. 20006
Attorney of Record Andrea Morisi
Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "AMERICAN" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

 

[maroulis]

I completely agree, they should go after the source as well, especially when selling domains that are so blatantly infringing.

I like how these Cybersquatters reg a domain, park it and then hide behind Privacy whois, Anybody here own this one?

Domain Name: AMERICAREDCROSS.COM
Registrant [6999]:
Moniker Privacy Services
20 SW 27th Ave.
Suite 201
Pompano Beach
FL
33069
US

What kind of low life targets a charity, diverting blood to their own bank account?....Like I said, Scumbags!

Word Mark AMERICAN RED CROSS
Goods and Services IC 036. US 100 101 102. G & S: Charitable fundraising. FIRST USE: 18811231. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 18811231
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 76448667
Filing Date September 11, 2002
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Published for Opposition April 29, 2003
Registration Number 2740131
Registration Date July 22, 2003
Owner (REGISTRANT) The American National Red Cross FEDERALLY CHARTERED CORPORATION UNITED STATES 430 17th St., NW Washington D.C. 20006
Attorney of Record Andrea Morisi
Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "AMERICAN" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

Does it really make a difference how much of a big TM squatter you are or what kind of moral boundaries you set on yourself? You can be a stupid thief going to jail for stealing a can of diet coke OR steal $400m from bank of England, in my book both are thiefs, one is stupid and one is kind of smarter.... Same with TMs I don't see the moral boundaries, i..e stealing from a Bank it's OK vs a non-profit organization, especially when we know there's NO SUCH THING as non-profit...

They fly using lear jets (corp owned), they entertain customers, bribe left & right and the list goes on and on....

So NO i don't think having a Red Cross TM typo is an issue, and if you're more aggressive towards those kind of squatters you're being a hypocrite

PS As for MSFT they are claiming maximum ACPA violation which is $100K per domain, last time I checked Bonkers had more like 120 of them which is $12M

 

[Gerry]

I am sure the registrars would tell you that they can't keep up with all the regs and can't monitor it...which is a lie. They don't want to. But they can.

If enterprises are making money by charging ebay a monthly fee to alert them anytime a domain with E B A Y is regged, then it can and is being done.

The certain ccTLD registry does this exact same thing. It has a program of some sort that blocks TM names from being registered. I was looking at pure generic words and many were blocked and came back as TM. If I felt it was in error, I was to contact the registry. I did not go that far, but I imagine if the word was available and I could show that there was not a TM issue, then I could perhaps sway them to allow me to register...or not.

So rather than put the blame squarely on the shoulders of he domainer all the time, then perhaps it is time to shift some of the focus. We all know that ICANN is such an inept bunch of folks. They can't enforce crooks like RegistryFly not making payments to ICANN so why in the hell depend on them for anything.

If Microsoft would look to the root of the problem, then problem solved.

Here's a listing on Pool right now:

2008microsoft.com

2010microsoft.net

2013microsoft.com

microsoftcrm4.com

microsoftsecuritycheck.com

microsoftspider.com

So if Pool is selling this, then they are facilitating the commission of a crime. Which registrar allowed these to be registered? They are also an accessory.

Do a search on Pool for Walmart (6), ebay (17), dell (13). But some innocent names would get caught up such as asianmodelling.com. So what's the worst that can happen when some one registered this. A red flag goes up and someone has to verify that it is not infringement on the TM Dell as in Dell computers.

What the hell are all those fees we are paying used for anyways? To light cigars of the fat cats?

I know, I know. It's like guns don't kill people, people kill people so you can't sue the gun makers. Screw that, before someone even wants to use that analogy.

This is not life and death and not rocket science. If these companies want to protect a brand and a mark, then go to the registrars and give them C&D's.

 

[Dave Zan]

They don't want to.

Because they have no incentive to do so given its magnitude. At least two
parties, Lockheed Martin and Size Inc., have gone to court but lost.

 

[Gerry]

Because they have no incentive to do so given its magnitude. At least two
parties, Lockheed Martin and Size Inc., have gone to court but lost.

Can you elaborate on this?

 

[Dave Zan]

Can you elaborate on this?

He he, I was actually looking through my notes and bookmarks on those as
of my previous post. I guess I should've refrained from doing so until I have
them on hand.

Unfortunately I no longer have a working link on the Size Inc v NSI dispute,
although I think John B has a copy of that. But for Lockheed Martin:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/property00/domain/LockheedShort.html

NSI is not liable for contributory infringement as a matter of law.

Size Inc. got the same result in 2003.