3 ms·

Yes, it is possible, but the above are slightly different cases. And, yes, it's not going to be easy, but should we let the crooks win? Because this is not abou

by nikolay 10y ago

Yes, it is possible, but the above are slightly different cases. And, yes, it's not going to be easy, but should we let the crooks win? Because this is not about somebody liking a domain name and willing to buy it - this is about someone liking the name and feeling entitled to get it for free. I am surprised that now two hackers are advising just to give up.

notahacker 10y ago
See it the other way round. It costs him $1.5k plus lawyers' fees to bring it to court, and the burden of proof is on him to prove you registered it in bad faith or are using it in a manner likely to benefit from confusion with his trademark. He probably wouldn't win even against a letter drafted by you that simply states that you registered the domain prior on $DATE prior to his registering the trademark, your development plans for the domain involve are in $INDUSTRY and there is no realistic expectation of confusion with his newly registered service mark. So you can probably interpret the threat as a bluff, and if he actually did follow through with it, it would cost him a lot more than the $200 he's offered so far. That said there's probably little reason for you to turn down a less insubstantial offer for a name which generates you no revenue and presumably isn't integral to your development idea if you ever choose to pursue it. I'd have thought that calling his bluff was the right response, along the lines of "I registered the domain X years prior to your decision to adopt a variant of that name for your own purposes. My development plans for this domain in $industry do not involve financial services in any way and thus no possibility of confusion with your financial services firm exists. Any move on your part to pursue this via UDRP would therefore almost certainly be a waste of your money and time. I have invested my own money and time in the domain and my development project for it, and have no intention of changing my business plans unless it is financially worthwhile for me to do so."

by nikolay 10y ago

notahacker 10y ago

See it the other way round. It costs him $1.5k plus lawyers' fees to bring it to court, and the burden of proof is on him to prove you registered it in bad faith or are using it in a manner likely to benefit from confusion with his trademark. He probably wouldn't win even against a letter drafted by you that simply states that you registered the domain prior on $DATE prior to his registering the trademark, your development plans for the domain involve are in $INDUSTRY and there is no realistic expectation of confusion with his newly registered service mark. So you can probably interpret the threat as a bluff, and if he actually did follow through with it, it would cost him a lot more than the $200 he's offered so far. That said there's probably little reason for you to turn down a less insubstantial offer for a name which generates you no revenue and presumably isn't integral to your development idea if you ever choose to pursue it. I'd have thought that calling his bluff was the right response, along the lines of "I registered the domain X years prior to your decision to adopt a variant of that name for your own purposes. My development plans for this domain in $industry do not involve financial services in any way and thus no possibility of confusion with your financial services firm exists. Any move on your part to pursue this via UDRP would therefore almost certainly be a waste of your money and time. I have invested my own money and time in the domain and my development project for it, and have no intention of changing my business plans unless it is financially worthwhile for me to do so."