Sold, dropped and then UDRP by buyer.

[dvdrip]

mercer.info

I will post all documents in a few hours cause they are not online yet.

 

[companyone]

Hi,

They file a UDRP

Would't it have not been easier for them to just buy the domain for the 2k+ this cost them? I mean it was going to cost then 2K+ win or lose right?

Peace!
Dan

 

[WhoWhere]

Maybe the amount involved was much higher than $2K

 

[dvdrip]

It cost them a lot more than 2k.

http://www.bluepixel.gr/udrp/
It's an interesting read...

 

[Dave Zan]

Would't it have not been easier for them to just buy the domain for the 2k+ this cost them? I mean it was going to cost then 2K+ win or lose right?

Yup. But they decided to take a chance anyway...and apparently lost.

Edit: just read the decision posted above. Considering only one panelist dealt
with this and you handled it directly, what can I say but impressive?

 

[namestrands]

Bravo// DVDrip... Excellent defence.. your rhetoric is far more superior than many lawyers I have seen defend these cases. Good on you.

May have to call upon your consultancy one day.

 

[Andrew Shaw]

Very nicely done. Feel great doesnt it?

No one should be pushed around. If your gut tells you that you are right, fight for your rights. You should have ended off with, " Thank you for your time, and I look forward to doing business with you in the future."

By the way... This is a good time to consider making the domain name untouchable, or almost. You are now attached to the domain name, and wouldnt consider selling it unless your original asking price is multiplied by 10.

Great Job.

 

[dvdrip]

Thanks!

I worked had for this one so I am celebrating today!!!

 

[Dave Zan]

I actually need a kind of refresher on one detail from the decision posted. The
complainant tried to anonymously buy the domain name thru Sedo, then tried
to argue bad faith by using that against the respondent when it broke down.

In essense, that's like an exception to the general belief that selling a domain
name to a trademark holder is bad faith since they made the offer first rather
than the other way around. Well, for so-called generic domain names that had
no signs of commercial association of any sort to the trademark or competing
products, anyway, something like that.

Although moot, couldn't that bit be a so-called reasonable ground to find that
the complainant abused the UDRP? Weren't there previous decisions with that
similarity or so, or I guess this is a case of changing times?

IMHO I think you're lucky your reply to their UDRP threat wasn't taken against
you. But then, you won.

 

[dvdrip]

Well, they threatened me and I told them they had to luck at udrp and to get lost!

 

[Bashar]

did you ask the same amount you asked the first time ?

 

[dvdrip]

Yes, that was 4k.

 

[NameGuy]

Congrats on your win. In reading the discussion, yes you won but just barely. The case is interesting to me on a couple of points. One, that your stated intent to use the domain for your regions.info site was disregarded because of not providing evidence of 'demonstrable preparations'. In other words, just saying you are going to use a domain for a site won't fly unless you show evidence of the development work. Secondly, if the complainant had not used a 3rd party as the buyer and also had changed the whois to their info after the first purchase, you more than likely would have lost since it would be evident on this second time around that you knew about the company and their marks. In other words, they screwed up. But obviously, they are not too smart for paying 4K for a domain and then letting it drop. Perhaps Mr Woods is at fault in this regard. Having lost this case, I am sure they are going to be watching so be careful how you use the name in the future. It would be my guess that they won't approach you again to try and buy it. It obviously wasn't too important to them if they let it drop, but I could be wrong. If they do, I'd be sure to squeeze them hard the next time. Congrats again.

 

[carlton]

Thanks!

I worked had for this one so I am celebrating today!!!

Congrats!

 

[companyone]

Its a GREAT....win.

So, now sell it to them for 5k-8k...and the pot will be right!

Gotta love this story!

UDRP for a .info...and lose...WTF?

Great WIN!

Peace!
Dan

 

[dvdrip]

One, that your stated intent to use the domain for your regions.info site was disregarded because of not providing evidence of 'demonstrable preparations'. In other words, just saying you are going to use a domain for a site won't fly unless you show evidence of the development work.

I actually made a mistake on this one. I forgot to include a screenshot of regions.info in the Annexes. I had 18 Annexes but I should have included that no matter how primitive the website seems.

Secondly, if the complainant had not used a 3rd party as the buyer and also had changed the whois to their info after the first purchase, you more than likely would have lost since it would be evident on this second time around that you knew about the company and their marks. In other words, they screwed up. But obviously, they are not too smart for paying 4K for a domain and then letting it drop. Perhaps Mr Woods is at fault in this regard. Having lost this case, I am sure they are going to be watching so be careful how you use the name in the future. It would be my guess that they won't approach you again to try and buy it. It obviously wasn't too important to them if they let it drop, but I could be wrong. If they do, I'd be sure to squeeze them hard the next time. Congrats again.

Actually I could have won even if they had changed whois. But then again I will never found out and I don't care! I would be interesting though to read a discussion about using or not the domain in bad faith. Panel stopped the discussion after he accepted that I didn't registered the domain in bad faith.

 

[denny007]

Very good answer. Must have taken tens of hours.

 

[DoctorZarkov]

Interesting case. I lost a UDRP case a few years ago which should have been found in my favor. Just be aware that each panel is different and could make a different decision on the same case. Also, at some point soon the decision will officially be posted at:

http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/case.jsp?case_id=11966

via a link from:

http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2007/d2007-1425.html

dvdrip, this case sure went a lot better for you than this one!

 

[denny007]

Just be aware that each panel is different and could make a different decision on the same case.

Exactly. For some valuable domains ALWAYS go for 3-member panel. The biggest SOB panelist is "Richard W. Page", he is example of why one should go for 3-member panel. Because to get this panelist = you lost the domain. Wouldn't surprise me one day some "accident" happens to this SOB when he strips of valuable generic domain someone who does not like to get foked from some moneyless salon communist with temporar power...

 

[domainer111]

Well done!! Greart work.