Legal News

Responsibility of Auction Houses & Domain Registrars Regarding Legal Threats

Gavel

As many of you read yesterday, the non-profit organization, Goodwill Industries International has sued the owner of Goodwill.com for alleged trademark infringement, after he won the name in a Namejet auction for north of $55k. This doesn’t come as a surprise to me at all. Case in point, one of my clients was a bidder in that auction, and when it was in the $25,000 range, he asked my opinion on the value. My reply was, “there’s a thrift shop like salvation army… could be TM risk if monetized that way.”

The surprise to me in this situation was actually what was found in the lawsuit pdf (also found on DNW). According to Goodwill Industries’ complaint, “Upon learning of the auction from Radia Holdings, Goodwill contacted the registrar of the domain name, Network Solutions, to attempt to prevent the auction from going forward, but was unsuccessful.”

Whether Network Solutions passed this information to its partner Namejet is something we probably won’t know. It also might be possible that the information may not have been sent through the appropriate channels at Network Solutions, and the issue died in the customer service queue. Whatever the case is in this situation, it bothers me that Goodwill Industries claims that Net Sol had information that would have rendered this domain name even more risky for a domain investor to monetize.

I read a post on Namepros where Snapnames VP of Engineering, Nelson Brady reached out to bidders on the JeniferLopez.com auction to inform them that Snapnames had received a notice from Jennifer Lopez’ lawyer regarding the name. Although the domain name later appeared to be registered to “domainqueue@gmail.com,” a company allegedly linked to bidder Halvarez, one has to wonder if Snapnames had or has a policy of informing bidders of potential legal threats.

As far as my client recalls, he didn’t receive any notice from Namejet while bidding on Goodwill.com. Of course one could argue that there are plenty of proper uses for Goodwill.com that would not infringe on Goodwill Industries’ trademark. Why would Namejet or other auction house risk dampening interest in an auction when there are plenty of ways it could be used without any problems? That wouldn’t make a lot of fiscal sense.

My question is this: what responsibility should a domain registrar or auction house have when they receive a legal threat for a domain name that is going to be listed for sale by them or a partner? I am sure domain registrars and domain auction houses receive legal notices all the time. They aren’t a judge or jury, so it’s probably not their place to provide legal advice, but should they make bidders aware of a potential legal threat?

Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/joegratz/ / CC BY-NC 2.0

Rihanna.com Offered for Sale on DNForum; UDRP Filed Months Later

RihannaThe domain name Rihanna.com was offered for sale on DNForum back in June of 2009.   According to the updated thread, the domain name was later sold for an undisclosed amount of money. As you are probably aware, Rihanna happens to be the name of a popular musician, whose full name is Robyn Rihanna Fenty.

While looking through recent UDRP filings at the National Arbitration Forum, I noticed that there was a UDRP filed for Rihanna.com. At the moment, there is a Network Solutions coming soon page on Rihanna.com, and there’s nothing on the landing page that mentions the musician, who currently holds the #11 spot on the Billboard 100.

The moral of this post is that if you have a domain name that could potentially be seen as infringing on another company’s trademark (which can happen even with the most generic of names), you need to be cautious where you list it for sale and what you say when you list it. Assuming it was the singer’s legal team that filed the UDRP, I am sure this line didn’t help the owner, “Rihanna.com Correct Spelling!”

Soon enough will will know if the complainant saw the sale on DNForum, elsewhere, or if they targeted it without having seen whether or not it was for sale, but it’s something to keep in mind when you are selling a domain name.

There have been other cases where the complainant cited a for sale listing on a domain forum as part of its complaint. Some of these cases include RymanAuditorium.com, EliteModels.com, WWF.com, and AirDeccan.com

Photo credit:http://www.flickr.com/photos/burningkarma/ / CC BY 2.0

Facebook Scam Hits Domain Investor

8

FacebookI know this is a fairly well-documented scam, but I understand it’s impacted a member of the domain community, so I wanted to share it with you. The premise is that a hacker gains access to a person’s Facebook account and sends instant messages to that person’s friends asking for money.

While the premise behind the scam changes, it’s most often related to being stuck in a situation without money or access to funds. In many cases, the scammer claims that he was robbed at gun point, and all credit cards, cash, and mobile devices were taken. The scammer claims to immediately need cash via Western Union or some other difficult to track money transfer.

One reason I point this out is because many people who are connected on Facebook aren’t actually closely related in real life and may not know the person (and their diction) very well. In addition, they may not know where their “friends” travel and how often, so the scam may not seem unrealistic at first glance.

Keep your passwords secure, make sure they are different for different websites, and if someone reaches out to you, be sure to email or call the person making the request. Chances are good that it’s a scammer whose gained access to someone’s account without that person’s knowledge.

Razorbacks.com: Legitimate Use of a Trademark Term

I pay very close attention to UDRP filings on generic domain names. I receive a daily email with UDRP decisions and frequently visit the NAF and WIPO websites to see what UDRPs have been filed. Oftentimes, the complainant feels the domain owner is infringing upon its trademark rights by displaying advertising of related products or services, as was the case with Dolphins.com.

However, there are plenty of UDRP filings that are overreaching, and I am happy to see the panelist(s) deny the complainants attempts. Today, I received the WIPO UDRP decision for Razorbacks.com, filed by Board of Trustees of the University of Arkansas of Little Rock, Arkansas, whose sports teams are known as the Razorbacks.

The owner of the domain name first registered the name in 1995, and the University contacted him about it several years later, in 2003. In the response, the University claims it sent the owner a cease and desist letter and also claimed that the domain owner owns the .com domain names of several college sports team brands, including Aggies.com (Texas A&M), Badgers.com (University of Wisconsin), Wolverines.com (University of Michigan), and Terrapins.com (University of Maryland).The domain names are and were used for vanity email addresses.

The three member panel found that the domain name was identical or confusingly similar to the complainant’s trademark, which is pretty clear. When the panel looked at the issue of Rights or Legitimate Interests in the domain name, they referred to other UDRP cases where vanity email addresses were considered a legitimate offering of goods/services. In addition, the panel cited the “multiple alternative uses of the term “razorbacks,” and they concluded that the could not side with the complainant on this matter. As a result, the complaint was denied.

Owners of similar generic domain names should note that the panelists did not say that the use of vanity email addresses on a domain name is reason enough to deny a complaint. In addition, the panelists made it clear that this could be a case for a court to ultimately decide, stating “Whether Complainant would have more success in a court of law, where evidence may be fully developed and examined through the use of discovery, interrogatories and other forensic processes and where standards other than those of the Policy may be applied, is not for this Panel to say.”

Whether University of Arkansas decides to pursue this through the court system is something we may learn about in the future, but for now, it’s good to see a panel deciding a case on its merits and not making assumptions about a domain owner’s intent.

(Razorbacks image courtesy of Wikipedia)

Domain Investors Need to Take Better Care of Valuable Domain Names

28

In April of 2008, Jay Westerdal announced that his company had the exclusive sales listing for the generic domain name Harmony.com, and the reserve price was $5,000,000. I don’t recall seeing whether the domain name was sold or not, but I just saw that a UDRP was filed at NAF for Harmony.com on November 12, 2009 (Case #1292225).

Since the NAF doesn’t list the Complainant yet, I can only guess it is the parent company of eHarmony.com who would file a complaint, as they seem the most likely to want the domain name. At first, it would seem like a company is making a grab at this great generic domain name, but if you take a further look at the parked page, it looks less like that. Not only is there a link to learn about purchasing the domain name, there are also dating site links, including one for eHarmony.com. This was just on the main landing page, without even having to do a search to influence the results.

Harmony.com Screenshot

I believe this is similar to a recent case involving Dolphins.com, where the owner had football-related PPC links, and the Miami Dolphins filed a UDRP for Dolphins.com. Although the domain owner does have very limited control over what content is displayed on parked page, owners need to be very careful not to put their valuable domain names at risk.

In a UDRP, a trademark owner needs to prove three things: 1) the complainant has a trademark right that is identical or confusingly similar to the domain name in question, 2) the domain owner has no right or legitimate interest in the domain name, and 3) the domain owner registered and used the domain in bad faith.

Sure, virtually any company can file a UDRP for any domain name they would like (as we’ve seen many times with cases like Pig.com for example), but we shouldn’t make it any easier for them to use the UDRP process to acquire domain names. Harmony.com is a good generic domain name, and it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Don’t Mess with Verizon, Motorola, and Lucasfilm

Just about every time a big company announces the launch of a new product, people buy related domain names for a multitude of reasons. Some buy them with the hopes of selling them to another company, others want to capitalize on potential popular typos, and yet others want to offer services, forums, special offers or other information related to the product.

On November 8th, Verizon Wireless began selling the Motorola Droid, a new smartphone that has had a whole lot of positive press and reviews. I’ve seen dozens of commercials for the Droid (if not more than dozens), and they seem to be directly taking on the iPhone and other smart phones. Needless to say, the Droid will be in high demand, and people will think they can make money by buying and selling Droid domain names.

However, with this particular trademark, you really need to be very careful of the usage of related domain names. On the bottom of Droid-related pages on Verizon Wireless’ website, there is a legal notice, “DROID is a trademark of Lucasfilm Ltd. and its related companies.”

By registering domain names with the term “droid” in it, you will probably be stepping on the feet of Verizon, Motorola, and Lucasfilm. Keep this in mind in the event that you think you might be able to make money with this mark. Obviously there are way to use “droid” in a domain name without potential liability, but I am sure there are plenty of people who don’t realize the risk of owning these with the intent of profiting off of the Droid mark, by selling, parking, or otherwise monetizing phone-related Droid names.

Recent Posts

Saw.com Announces $100 Million in Domain Name Deals

1
The Saw.com domain name sales brokerage and sales platform announced a milestone this morning. The company surpassed $100,000,000 in domain name deals. I presume...

That Company May Cease to Exist

1
I received a strong offer on one of my one word .com domain names last week. I declined, but in the process of doing...

Auction Platforms Shouldn’t Benefit from Default Bidders

13
If the winning bidder for a domain name auction does not pay and the auction platform offers the domain name to the next highest...

LTO is Betting on the Buyer and the Platform

2
When you agree to a lease-to-own (LTO) domain name deal, you’re making two bets: one on the buyer’s ability and willingness to complete the...

Andrew Rosener on Miss Understood Podcast

2
Andrew Rosener is one of the top domain brokers. I had to strike "one of" because I know as soon as I hit publish,...