Typosquatter Fined US$164'000 by FTC

[Focus]

They (FTC) should'nt get the money...the advertisers should if anything! duh

 

[socalboy]

It's not the FTC itself that gets the money, it's the US Treasury. Fines go to the government, court-ordered restitution would go to victims of the conduct. So he did his little part to fund the war in Iraq.

 

[RTM.net]

So he did his little part to fund the war in Iraq.

Yikes, I sense this thread going way OT real quick.

$164K is relatively small money - perhaps a few seconds of the (overt) ops cost in Iraq.

But in terms of what the FTC reaps with regards to the well being of overall cloud - the Internet and domain owners... humm this is a lesson to others monetizing the typo game,.....

Just my $0.0164

Rob

 

[Focus]

no, a lesson not to break a federal court order after your ass got out of the slammer for child porn..two totally different things going on here

 

[edbri871]

You do realize that these companies will 99% of the time send you an email or a C & D order in the mail requesting you turn over the domain. If you don't then there could be issues. Stop trying to scare everyone. Any company out there has no reason not to quietly send out a C & D order and ask for the name, unless you either have a huge stockpile of hundreds of their typos or are using the traffic to direct people and children unwantingly to porn, adware, or virus's.

Relax!

 

[Brett Lewis]

You do realize that these companies will 99% of the time send you an email or a C & D order in the mail requesting you turn over the domain.

This is less true now than in the past. Trademark lawyers and owners are getting more aggressive. Certain bad faith actors who cyber-flee and file frivolous pre-emptive litigation in unfavorable forums are responsible.

The unfortunate result is that the trademark bar is growing less willing to take a chance and send a letter, and clients who got burned are more likely to seek damages in Court.

 

[DNQuest.com]

Hi Brett, I think I am a bright guy, but I am a little lost with what you are trying to say here. Would you be so kind to dummy it down for a me a bit please?

 

[Brett Lewis]

No problem.

There is a company out there registering typos of famous and registered trademarks. Upon receipt of a cease and desist letter, they sue the party that sent the letter. The suits are filed in an inhospitable jurisdiction. Don't mess with Texas.

The trademark owner now has to appear and defend the suit. My sense is that the reason these suits are being filed, is to force the trademark owner into making an economic decision -- pay for the domain name or pay much more to litigate in court.

There are other examples of registrants cancelling registrations after promising them to a trademark holder, or changing the whois records to make it look like the domain has been transferred to a third party.

The aggregation of these and other similar acts is causing more trademark attorneys to question the validity of sending a cease and desist letter before filing a UDRP. Several attorneys have explained that the reason they filed first, without sending my clients a letter, was prior experience with bad actors.

Hope this helps.

 

[DNQuest.com]

Thanx Brett, I do appreciate the time you and our other esteemed experts share with us. It does not go unnoticed.

It is amazing what people would do for money. It is actions like this and other schemes that will make it easier and easier for TM holders to recover domains, and easier and easier for them to overreach. It is the latter part that scares me.