3 ms·

They made a stupid mistake, they should not be allowed to get it back.

ajross 14y ago
That's maybe going too far. Clearly this is a prank. The current owner has the right (abstractly -- honestly I have no idea how this works in French law) to express their opinion as parody, and Michelin shouldn't be able to use the trademark as a cudgel to suppress that. That said, the proper remedy here is for them to buy back the domain name at a fair market price (whatever that may be, again I have no idea). The owner shouldn't be able to "ransom" the name for an unfair price, either.
- UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
  > The owner shouldn't be able to "ransom" the name for an unfair price, either. Why? It is his property, he can do what he wants with it.
- darxius 14y ago
  Why not? It was their mistake, they forgot to renew a domain (something even I keep on top of). The guy bought it legally and is now hosting his own website. I don't see how the company would have any right to get that domain back if the guy doesn't want to sell it. Then again, IANAL.
  - phillmv 14y ago
    That's not how trademark law works, and in this case, for good reason http://www.chillingeffects.org/domain/faq.cgi#QID245 http://www.chillingeffects.org/domain/faq.cgi#QID245 Fucking with a guy who thought MikeRoweSoft was funny? Probably not cool. Losing out on MichelinGuides for a dude who set up a prank? Eh, I'm siding with Michelin in this case.
  - darxius 14y ago
    I don't see how he's infringing on their copyright with the site he currently has set up. It's not like he's masquerading as the real deal and tricking people into donating or whatever. I don't see why this guy should have to give up his legally obtained domain because some company failed to do their job. If he's smart, he'll skip court and settle for a lot of money/perks.
- pc86 14y ago
  It's his. He can do with it what he pleases. If he wants to keep it, it should be his prerogative. If he wants to say "I'm happy to keep it, unless you happen to have half a million Euros lying around" he should be able to do that as well. In the end, FMP is determined by what anyone is willing to pay.
- drcube 14y ago
  I'd be a lot more sympathetic if the domain was actively used and somehow a clerical error made them lose it. However, according to gus_massa in another comment, this was always just a parked domain. Why should someone return (or sell back at a "fair" price) a domain they legally bought, just to have it fall back into disuse?
- chimeracoder 14y ago
  > The owner shouldn't be able to "ransom" the name for an unfair price, either. Since there is a supply of n=1, please define what an "unfair" price is, if you're not comfortable with defining it as the amount that Michelin is willing to pay.
  - ajross 14y ago
    I can't tell if this is a joke or not. You don't think exploiting a monopoly position on a good whose value is defined by someone else's trademark is "unfair"? It's the very definition of unfair, sorry. The real world, and the law, recognize that. I'm disturbed that you don't. The prank is acceptable. The ransom is not.

That's maybe going too far. Clearly this is a prank. The current owner has the right (abstractly -- honestly I have no idea how this works in French law) to express their opinion as parody, and Michelin shouldn't be able to use the trademark as a cudgel to suppress that. That said, the proper remedy here is for them to buy back the domain name at a fair market price (whatever that may be, again I have no idea). The owner shouldn't be able to "ransom" the name for an unfair price, either.

UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
> The owner shouldn't be able to "ransom" the name for an unfair price, either. Why? It is his property, he can do what he wants with it.
darxius 14y ago
Why not? It was their mistake, they forgot to renew a domain (something even I keep on top of). The guy bought it legally and is now hosting his own website. I don't see how the company would have any right to get that domain back if the guy doesn't want to sell it. Then again, IANAL.
- phillmv 14y ago
  That's not how trademark law works, and in this case, for good reason http://www.chillingeffects.org/domain/faq.cgi#QID245 http://www.chillingeffects.org/domain/faq.cgi#QID245 Fucking with a guy who thought MikeRoweSoft was funny? Probably not cool. Losing out on MichelinGuides for a dude who set up a prank? Eh, I'm siding with Michelin in this case.
- darxius 14y ago
  I don't see how he's infringing on their copyright with the site he currently has set up. It's not like he's masquerading as the real deal and tricking people into donating or whatever. I don't see why this guy should have to give up his legally obtained domain because some company failed to do their job. If he's smart, he'll skip court and settle for a lot of money/perks.
pc86 14y ago
It's his. He can do with it what he pleases. If he wants to keep it, it should be his prerogative. If he wants to say "I'm happy to keep it, unless you happen to have half a million Euros lying around" he should be able to do that as well. In the end, FMP is determined by what anyone is willing to pay.
drcube 14y ago
I'd be a lot more sympathetic if the domain was actively used and somehow a clerical error made them lose it. However, according to gus_massa in another comment, this was always just a parked domain. Why should someone return (or sell back at a "fair" price) a domain they legally bought, just to have it fall back into disuse?
chimeracoder 14y ago
> The owner shouldn't be able to "ransom" the name for an unfair price, either. Since there is a supply of n=1, please define what an "unfair" price is, if you're not comfortable with defining it as the amount that Michelin is willing to pay.
- ajross 14y ago
  I can't tell if this is a joke or not. You don't think exploiting a monopoly position on a good whose value is defined by someone else's trademark is "unfair"? It's the very definition of unfair, sorry. The real world, and the law, recognize that. I'm disturbed that you don't. The prank is acceptable. The ransom is not.