6 ms·

You need to speak with a qualified domain name attorney, not just any attorney or solicitor. As Director of a domain name protection company (and not an attorn

You need to speak with a qualified domain name attorney, not just any attorney or solicitor. As Director of a domain name protection company (and not an attorney) I can offer this: If you registered the domain name before the other party files for a trademark, then there is no way you would have known that they would file for the mark. So, in most cases you probably don’t have to give up the domain name. It comes down to whether or. Or you registered the domain “in bad faith” or not. And again, how would you know they would start their business and get a trademark? You wouldn’t. Are you in the same industry and compete with each other? If so, there might be an issue, but I’d your site offers different products and there would be no confusion between companies or websites, then there may not be an issue. The best way to handle this is to get a domain name attorney to respond to their letter to you, essentially telling them to go away, and that you plan on keeping the domain name. If you cannot afford an attorney, look for a company that offers domain name insurance or a domain name warranty, if you have an issue like this with your domain name, your legal fees to defend the domain are covered. As you have described the situation here, you bought the domain before they filed for their trademark, and you’re not pretending to be them. So you should be able to keep the domain. They are just trying to “ strong arm” the domain away from you with a threatening letter. If they do sue you or file a udrp, defend yourself with the help of a good domain name attorney.

gnu8 5y ago
> They are just trying to “ strong arm” the domain away from you with a threatening letter. This isn't ok and making them go away isn't good enough. They need to pay for having made that long list of demands and threats, ideally by having their whole business taken away and given to OP.
- bhartzer 5y ago
  Agreed, it’s not okay. Some companies are found guilty of reverse domain hijacking after filing a udrp.
tomxor 5y ago
>Are you in the same industry and compete with each other? If so, there might be an issue ... > as I was using the name 7+ years before them with a similar product Sounds like they are, but that the issue is in the reverse, they are trying to steal the authors market and product directly by using their name. This is very aggressive, not to mention wrong.
- Buttons840 5y ago
  Hope to read a follow up post one day about how the end result of this letter is the company who sent the letter loses their trademark and domains.
  - tomxor 5y ago
    > the company who sent the letter loses their trademark and domains. That may not be punishment enough to prevent them from becoming a repeat offender. In an ideal world the result would cost the directors the right to start a business for a long period of time. I don't see that as too severe in any light - This is pretty close to fraud: trying to undercut market forces by dishonestly claiming rights to the name of a business with 7 years more history. Their only defence to malicious intent would be ignorance of the author's business existence prior to theirs - which is completely unbelievable considering that's the first and most obvious fact that will be used to settle the issue. Their lawyers would have to claim complete incompetence.
    - z3t4 5y ago
      Its unlikely that their lawyers are completely incompetent. For example King trademarked candy then sent a CaD letter to the makers of the original candy game that they had ripped off - and got away with it. Unless there are more to the story i think the op can just ignore the letter. And step up the SEO so that the other business will have a hard time competing. There will always be people that try shortcuts to success by committing fraud. And there will always be suckers that will get fooled. The tactic is often to scare - don't fall for it.
  - donmcronald 5y ago
donmcronald 5y ago
> If you cannot afford an attorney, look for a company that offers domain name insurance or a domain name warranty, if you have an issue like this with your domain name, your legal fees to defend the domain are covered. I've never heard of that before and all I can find trying to search are sites about the `.insurance` TLD. Anyone got any links to some examples?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- bhartzer 5y ago
  DNProtect offers domain name protection plans for exactly this reason. If the OP had domain name protection all the legal fees of defending the name would be covered.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Someone 5y ago
> If you cannot afford an attorney, look for a company that offers domain name insurance or a domain name warranty, if you have an issue like this with your domain name, your legal fees to defend the domain are covered. I would think it’s too late for that. Insurers typically (and most of the time rightfully, exceptions being cases were law requires them to do so, as is the case with health insurance in some countries) do not cover cases known before the insurance started. If they covered past issues, nobody would take insurance before they knew they needed it.
- bhartzer 5y ago
  The OP only received a letter, and hasn’t been sued. It’s not too late to set up domain protection. Business insurance and cyber liability insurance doesn’t cover domain names. You have to get a domain name protection company to cover the domain.
  - d13 5y ago
    Surely the insurer would become suspicious if the OP was then sued soon after, and then refuse to pay? My experience with insurance companies is that they will go to the ends of the earth to avoid paying anything.
T3RMINATED 5y ago
in other words... if you are broke, you are toast! They will sue you to Bankruptcy... Welcome to America.

gnu8 5y ago

> They are just trying to “ strong arm” the domain away from you with a threatening letter. This isn't ok and making them go away isn't good enough. They need to pay for having made that long list of demands and threats, ideally by having their whole business taken away and given to OP.

bhartzer 5y ago
Agreed, it’s not okay. Some companies are found guilty of reverse domain hijacking after filing a udrp.

tomxor 5y ago

>Are you in the same industry and compete with each other? If so, there might be an issue ... > as I was using the name 7+ years before them with a similar product Sounds like they are, but that the issue is in the reverse, they are trying to steal the authors market and product directly by using their name. This is very aggressive, not to mention wrong.

Buttons840 5y ago
Hope to read a follow up post one day about how the end result of this letter is the company who sent the letter loses their trademark and domains.
- tomxor 5y ago
  > the company who sent the letter loses their trademark and domains. That may not be punishment enough to prevent them from becoming a repeat offender. In an ideal world the result would cost the directors the right to start a business for a long period of time. I don't see that as too severe in any light - This is pretty close to fraud: trying to undercut market forces by dishonestly claiming rights to the name of a business with 7 years more history. Their only defence to malicious intent would be ignorance of the author's business existence prior to theirs - which is completely unbelievable considering that's the first and most obvious fact that will be used to settle the issue. Their lawyers would have to claim complete incompetence.
  - z3t4 5y ago
    Its unlikely that their lawyers are completely incompetent. For example King trademarked candy then sent a CaD letter to the makers of the original candy game that they had ripped off - and got away with it. Unless there are more to the story i think the op can just ignore the letter. And step up the SEO so that the other business will have a hard time competing. There will always be people that try shortcuts to success by committing fraud. And there will always be suckers that will get fooled. The tactic is often to scare - don't fall for it.
- donmcronald 5y ago

donmcronald 5y ago

> If you cannot afford an attorney, look for a company that offers domain name insurance or a domain name warranty, if you have an issue like this with your domain name, your legal fees to defend the domain are covered. I've never heard of that before and all I can find trying to search are sites about the `.insurance` TLD. Anyone got any links to some examples?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
bhartzer 5y ago
DNProtect offers domain name protection plans for exactly this reason. If the OP had domain name protection all the legal fees of defending the name would be covered.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Someone 5y ago

> If you cannot afford an attorney, look for a company that offers domain name insurance or a domain name warranty, if you have an issue like this with your domain name, your legal fees to defend the domain are covered. I would think it’s too late for that. Insurers typically (and most of the time rightfully, exceptions being cases were law requires them to do so, as is the case with health insurance in some countries) do not cover cases known before the insurance started. If they covered past issues, nobody would take insurance before they knew they needed it.

bhartzer 5y ago
The OP only received a letter, and hasn’t been sued. It’s not too late to set up domain protection. Business insurance and cyber liability insurance doesn’t cover domain names. You have to get a domain name protection company to cover the domain.
- d13 5y ago
  Surely the insurer would become suspicious if the OP was then sued soon after, and then refuse to pay? My experience with insurance companies is that they will go to the ends of the earth to avoid paying anything.

T3RMINATED 5y ago

in other words... if you are broke, you are toast! They will sue you to Bankruptcy... Welcome to America.