3 ms·

"domain through arbitration" No such thing as "arbitration". There is filing a UDRP though. Or a cybersquatting lawsuit (non-starter just mentioning). "sellin

by larrys 15y ago

"domain through arbitration" No such thing as "arbitration". There is filing a UDRP though. Or a cybersquatting lawsuit (non-starter just mentioning). "selling TapTyping on the App Store since the iPad came out almost 2 years" Because the domain was registered 6/2008, off the top without researching all the facts, you don't have a case from my experience. And filing will cost you (through http://www.adrforum.com http://www.adrforum.com) $1300 for 1 panelist and $2600 for 3 panelists. You can do this yourself but I wouldn't recommend going that route. There are other forums but last I checked adrforum.com is the most pro complainant as well as the least expensive (check, that may have changed but you won't find it for $9.95 or anything..). So if you need a lawyer to handle you need someone who specializes in this (you can write to me for suggestions). The cost for that is going to be in addition. That's if they take the case at all. The best ones might not take the case if they don't feel they will win because it will hurt their win rate. "The current owner has yet to do anything with the domain. It is just Godaddy parked." Of course as you know that doesn't mean anything. No requirement to use a domain name. "he simply replies that he "is not ready to sell the domain at this time"" Could be true, or could be a standard reply to get you to offer up some money and obviously (to me that is) not jeopardize any future proceeding. Saying you will sell can be used against you. "but even once the trademark clears is this an open and shut low risk case" Not at all. The advantage of filing is that the other person has to defend. That means they have to spend money and time. If the name isn't important they might just ignore the filing. In some cases when the filing is ignored the complainant gets the name by default. But not in every case. Sometimes the panelist(s) don't do that. Or they might reply, not use a lawyer, make a mistake and you might get the name. My research indicates this is the guy that owns it (there are many Jeff Merediths but I believe this is the one based on the mit.edu and his linkedin) http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jeffrey-meredith/19/b35/b2 http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jeffrey-meredith/19/b35/b2 How much money is the domain worth to you at this point? What you are willing to spend determines strategy.

awolf 15y ago
Thanks for the response Larry. Since all I'm willing to spend is in the ballpark of the UDRP filing, my major take-away is is that coming to an agreement without the use of legal tactics is optimal for both parties. I was surprised to hear you say I have no case though. I thought that owner of a domain needed to be able to show intent to make use of it. Otherwise, it could be argued that they are squatting the domain and holding it in bad faith. Is this not the case?
- larrys 15y ago
  Well it's pretty easy actually to show that you are using the domain but you don't have to always even do this. You just have to not be infringing on someone else in the majority of cases or at least have a leg to stand on. I know of a specific case where none other than American Express wanted a particular domain and wrote the scary lawyer letter. They received a letter back saying the domain was used for email. They never filed anything or took any further action. They went away. (And they had a trademark on the domain and I would say the name was valuable to them). A few years went by and the domain was then sold and the email transitioned. I know of another case involving the NBA as well. In that case the domain pointed to a site but it had nothing to do with basketball. And many others involving less prominent trademark owners. There is plenty of nuance in this business. It's hard to summarize everything or make generalizations. Every situation and strategy is different. In ways it's like the difference between reading about medicine on the Internet and seeing an actual doctor. Certain combination's of circumstances change strategy and management. No way to understand and read about it. It comes from experience and actual practice.

by larrys 15y ago

awolf 15y ago

Thanks for the response Larry. Since all I'm willing to spend is in the ballpark of the UDRP filing, my major take-away is is that coming to an agreement without the use of legal tactics is optimal for both parties. I was surprised to hear you say I have no case though. I thought that owner of a domain needed to be able to show intent to make use of it. Otherwise, it could be argued that they are squatting the domain and holding it in bad faith. Is this not the case?

larrys 15y ago
Well it's pretty easy actually to show that you are using the domain but you don't have to always even do this. You just have to not be infringing on someone else in the majority of cases or at least have a leg to stand on. I know of a specific case where none other than American Express wanted a particular domain and wrote the scary lawyer letter. They received a letter back saying the domain was used for email. They never filed anything or took any further action. They went away. (And they had a trademark on the domain and I would say the name was valuable to them). A few years went by and the domain was then sold and the email transitioned. I know of another case involving the NBA as well. In that case the domain pointed to a site but it had nothing to do with basketball. And many others involving less prominent trademark owners. There is plenty of nuance in this business. It's hard to summarize everything or make generalizations. Every situation and strategy is different. In ways it's like the difference between reading about medicine on the Internet and seeing an actual doctor. Certain combination's of circumstances change strategy and management. No way to understand and read about it. It comes from experience and actual practice.