Re: Re: OT: Domain Names LEGAL Stuff

["Wayne Kerr" <waynekerr169@xxxxxxx>]

>From: "mark_harrison_uk1" <Mark.Harrison@xxxxxxx>

I don't know the domain name involved but my opinions expressed below  are
based on the assumption that the domain name is not a registered trademark
of the company concerned.

>give legal advice. However, I am a senior manager with overall
>responsibility for Domain Name registrations for a FTSE 100 company
>with significant web presences Europe-wide. The following, however,
>is my personal opinion, not that of my employer.

Make your mind up. If you have overall responsibility for the subject in
question, your opinion is effectively that of your employer.

>Personally, I think that £100 + transfer costs is fair, and my advice
>would be to take it. If the company is a large, household name, then
>they might go to £500 + transfer costs, but are very unlikely to go
>any higher.

I personally think that £100, from the initial £50, plus transfer fees is a
poor offer for companies of almost any size. An appropriate domain name is
an increasingly valuable business asset. Just look at how much domain names
like news.com, slate.com and linux.com changed hands and you'll see that
the
sum offered is simply a bad joke. Even some of the new .tv names cost much
more than the sum offered. They could have added the money that they have
spent on solicitors to the offer to make it more attractive. They could at
least ask what sum the person has in mind. It could be £101 before they
know.

>I feel that, actually, the company has acted reasonably in making you
>the initial offer. The fact that they have threated legal action has
>happened only AFTER you have refused to consider this. However, the

The company, from the sound of it, acted in an aggressive manner. Two
token-sum offers and immediately followed by strong-arm tactics on an
individual.  They are obviously hoping that he would be scared by
official-looking papers into giving up his legally obtained domain name.

>As I see it as a laymam, there are a number of issues here. The key
>issue is that the UK legal system now very much frowns upon
>Cybersquatting - the deliberate registration of someone elses trading
>name with no intent to do anything other than sell on the domain name.

Whilst it is true about the hardening attitude of the courts towards
cybersquatting, there is no evidence of it here. The company concerned has
not been approached, I assume, for the possible sale of the domain name for
any amount.

>3: The fact that the names are .coms rather than .co.uks raises the
>question of whether the UK courts would have any jurisdiction. You

ICANN and WIPO usually arbitrate on domain name disputes.

>could argue that .com is, according the the standard, intended for
>use by US Companies, and that the ONLY basis for challenging a
>registration is that a company has registered a FEDERAL (not State)
>trademark as the contested name, and that US courts would have
>jurisdiction.

That was how .com was originally set up for but it is a recognised
international domain suffix now. Country specific suffixes are for regional
use. e.g. .us, .uk, .de.

>4: What do you intend doing with the domains? If you haven't used
>them for the last 18 months, and demonstrably had no intention of
>doing so AND refused a good faith offer, then there IS a chance that
>the courts could find in their favour, and you'd be stuffed. The fact

And that chance is very slim indeed. Even Network Solutions, the original
sole registrar for .com suffix, offer "domain parking" facilities
to negate
the need to have a real website.

>5: Do THEY have the name registered as a UK trademark? If not, then I
>don't think they have a leg to stand on unless you're passing off

Absolutely. If the name concerned is a registered trademark of the company
and the registration of the domain name is subsequent to the trademark
registration, the company concerned would have a strong case.

Wayne


_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com