Archive for the ‘domain names’ Category:
My eyes may be tricking me so I thought I’d ask some other domainers if the site Ipads.com was actually a site built last year, or was it built last week and made to look like it was a year old. You might ask why someone would backdate a site. I’m not sure unless it would give some status should Apple come banging on their doors for the domain.
Like most domainers, I typed ipad.com and ipads.com to see what was on those pages following last weeks announcement by Apple regarding the introduction of the ipad. I could have sworn that ipads.com was a registrar’s parking page. However when I went back yesterday, it was a blog, with articles dating back from last year. However, dates can backdated. Also, there no comments on any of the older threads. In addition, archives.org shows no site image from February 12th, 2008 forward.
Please let me know what you think.
While most of the Domain world was concentrated in Santa Monica last week, Sedo continued to have strong sales lead by Comtech.com @$60,000, Designer.co.uk @76,300 GBP and lundi.fr@50,000 EUR. I liked fro the list Hostdns.com for 6000 Eur, purchased.com 5,499 USD, and free-horoscope.com for $3200. As usual, the complete list follows.
Domain name Price Currency
.Coms
comtech.com 60,000 USD
isdb.com 53,500 USD
golfzone.com 50,000 USD
orbion.com 25,000 USD
pao.com 14,500 USD
russiacalling.com 12,650 GBP
1y.com 10,000 USD
listentome.com 10,000 USD
mobilelearning.com 10,000 USD
thick.com 10,000 USD
socialtalk.com 7,500 USD
require.com 7,000 USD
hostdns.com 6,000 EUR
tereva.com 5,899 EUR
purchased.com 5,499 USD
kaika.com 5,099 USD
celsia.com 5,000 USD
smartdigital.com 5,000 USD
echafaudage.com 4,500 EUR
avocadostore.com 4,500 USD
rateadentist.com 4,000 USD
cloudcraze.com 4,000 USD
couponmonster.com 4,000 USD
eqk.com 3,533 USD
elektrotankstelle.com 3,500 EUR
juchang.com 3,500 USD
coverscans.com 3,400 USD
paris-france-hotels.com 3,300 EUR
free-horoscope.com 3,200 USD
arglasses.com 3,100 USD
vetspace.com 3,100 USD
crittr.com 3,000 EUR
superflorists.com 3,000 USD
linkspy.com 3,000 USD
a9a.com 3,000 USD
mallorca-finca.com 2,850 EUR
fulldeckpoker.com 2,750 USD
gotmojo.com 2,750 USD
krusoe.com 2,750 EUR
planettitan.com 2,600 USD
supergreen.com 2,550 USD
tea2.com 2,500 USD
tevana.com 2,500 USD
bannerproductions.com 2,500 USD
cyclette.com 2,300 USD
hornysluts.com 2,300 USD
gritar.com 2,270 USD
livemaster.com 2,150 EUR
langzeitmiete.com 2,100 EUR
freetm.com 2,000 EUR
cashgiftingprogram.com 2,000 USD
thunderflash.com 2,000 USD
neosecure.com 2,000 USD
edmz.com 2,000 GBP
hotels-discounts.com 2,000 USD
solenergia.com 2,000 EUR
freecollectionletter.com 2,000 USD
kreishandwerkerschaften.com 2,000 USD
tesoltraining.com 2,000 USD
mygrandrapids.com 1,999 USD
no1traveler.com 1,990 USD
prepaidsex.com 1,900 USD
birminghamhotels.com 1,800 USD
mykauai.com 1,750 USD
bluetax.com 1,750 USD
loadingdockequipment.com 1,750 USD
verkaufstraining.com 1,700 EUR
pharmedica.com 1,700 USD
basketballnation.com 1,667 USD
superstudios.com 1,650 EUR
hitnews.com 1,500 USD
mylasiksurgery.com 1,500 USD
b-gov.com 1,500 EUR
water-for-life.com 1,500 USD
brandables.com 1,500 USD
ecoenergo.com 1,500 EUR
omeilleursprix.com 1,500 EUR
powerframe.com 1,500 USD
destinationexperience.com 1,500 USD
agiliant.com 1,500 USD
insquare.com 1,500 USD
bedzy.com 1,500 USD
travelkrabi.com 1,500 USD
brainframes.com 1,500 USD
e-tablet.com 1,500 USD
capitalgames.com 1,500 USD
my411.com 1,500 USD
aveltis.com 1,500 USD
travel-turkey.com 1,499 USD
teachersvoice.com 1,416 USD
iaas.com 1,388 USD
ipbank.com 1,300 USD
vinylsale.com 1,300 EUR
mejoresjuegos.com 1,300 EUR
neuroenhancement.com 1,250 EUR
brainyoga.com 1,245 USD
darvesh.com 1,200 USD
fitmobile.com 1,200 USD
elixys.com 1,200 EUR
musicpracticerooms.com 1,150 USD
business-community.com 1,150 EUR
eagleboys.com 1,100 USD
dailyapps.com 1,100 USD
dogtopia.com 1,100 EUR
namerobot.com 1,075 USD
zese.com 1,050 USD
briefdienst.com 1,049 EUR
foodstats.com 1,041 USD
superhomeinsurance.com 1,000 USD
famequest.com 1,000 USD
justinbell.com 1,000 USD
winterwarm.com 1,000 EUR
afieurope.com 1,000 USD
normajeane.com 1,000 USD
digitata.com 1,000 USD
starmeter.com 1,000 USD
monticellogroup.com 1,000 USD
webvideoproduction.com 1,000 GBP
clinicalondres.com 1,000 EUR
growsure.com 1,000 USD
coolget.com 1,000 USD
livejenny.com 999 USD
rossau.com 995 USD
scorched3d.com 987 USD
datenmeer.com 960 USD
2324.com 954 USD
prcontacts.com 950 USD
loadlok.com 950 EUR
davisenterprises.com 950 USD
replicawatchreviews.com 949 USD
6mablog.com 900 EUR
oblomov.com 900 EUR
outsourcelegal.com 900 USD
directoriofloral.com 900 EUR
lembongan.com 890 EUR
grouporganizer.com 888 USD
greatersanfrancisco.com 816 USD
englishantiques.com 810 EUR
jeanstribe.com 802 USD
heimkinosysteme.com 801 EUR
design-living.com 800 USD
progware.com 800 USD
bidongolf.com 800 EUR
laughterclinic.com 800 USD
menation.com 800 USD
mfsystem.com 800 USD
ledcanada.com 800 USD
kloops.com 800 USD
bubblebridge.com 800 USD
think24.com 800 USD
marketing-shop.com 800 USD
extendedschools.com 800 USD
lickety-split.com 800 USD
themezilla.com 800 EUR
matthewjones.com 799 USD
yorker.com 772 USD
6-3.com 753 USD
formularium.com 750 EUR
eltrago.com 750 EUR
rightfund.com 750 USD
newgirlgames.com 750 USD
roomrater.com 750 USD
drumpower.com 750 USD
progressiveautoparts.com 750 USD
centershop.com 750 USD
peerbot.com 740 EUR
trachtenschmuck.com 720 EUR
modernvilla.com 700 USD
econtext.com 700 USD
pimas.com 700 USD
ccTLDs
designer.co.uk 76,300 GBP
lundi.fr 50,000 EUR
dachbox.de 14,900 EUR
musiktotal.de 14,000 EUR
bathroomtiles.co.uk 9,000 GBP
ecommerce.it 8,400 EUR
assurancescooter.fr 5,000 EUR
mietwagenreisen.de 5,000 EUR
leerwereld.nl 4,500 EUR
gartenmöbel.eu 4,300 EUR
global.hk 4,300 EUR
rubiz.ru 4,200 USD
svanströms.com 4,153 EUR
urbi.ru 4,000 USD
gluehbirne.de 3,927 EUR
sportszone.de 3,900 EUR
jb.de 3,750 EUR
ecl.eu 3,565 EUR
aerogel.eu 3,500 EUR
tansania.ch 3,500 EUR
bmd.ch 3,200 EUR
maurice.mu 3,000 EUR
avando.de 3,000 EUR
aparthotels.de 3,000 EUR
trovit.cn 3,000 EUR
promovacances.be 2,500 EUR
backöfen.de 2,500 EUR
vornamen-datenbank.de 2,400 EUR
gassprings.eu 2,250 USD
anoniem.nl 2,250 EUR
bookfactory.eu 2,222 EUR
enfant.info 2,000 EUR
wireless.asia 1,750 USD
61.eu 1,750 EUR
schnäppchen.ch 1,650 EUR
verzamelingen.nl 1,500 EUR
flashbay.it 1,500 EUR
marketing-shop.de 1,500 EUR
fahnenmasten.de 1,428 EUR
billares.es 1,400 EUR
dovolená.eu 1,350 EUR
porzelan.de 1,312 EUR
e-business.pl 1,307 EUR
albañil.es 1,300 EUR
funai.es 1,290 EUR
gruenderwelt.de 1,200 EUR
brockmeyer.de 1,200 EUR
motoren-center.de 1,200 EUR
activelife.de 1,175 EUR
ecigarettes.co.uk 1,150 GBP
reisefhrer.eu 1,100 EUR
babystrollers.co.uk 1,070 GBP
betathome.com.pl 1,050 EUR
sauna-clubs.de 1,050 EUR
football-odds.co.uk 1,050 GBP
modular.be 1,050 EUR
nxc.fr 1,000 EUR
energycooperative.co.uk 1,000 GBP
richardmille.us 1,000 EUR
yotta.ch 1,000 EUR
yoga-vidia.de 1,000 EUR
visioneer.cn 1,000 USD
apis.eu 1,000 EUR
myfashion.co.uk 1,000 GBP
paperblog.es 1,000 EUR
eventsuk.co.uk 1,000 GBP
porzellan24.de 1,000 EUR
besser-leasen.de 1,000 EUR
energiedurable.fr 1,000 EUR
b5.de 1,000 EUR
onlinecasino.org.in 1,000 USD
bags.eu 1,000 EUR
barrie.tv 1,000 USD
umzug-muenchen.de 875 EUR
proled.hu 838 USD
schler.eu 810 EUR
kulturstudier.dk 800 USD
steuererklärung.eu 800 EUR
bs.vg 800 USD
designglas.de 800 EUR
businesschannel.tv 800 USD
eurotire.cn 800 USD
careerconcept.de 799 EUR
práce.eu 764 EUR
casino.gd 750 GBP
mp5.nl 750 EUR
asx.nl 750 EUR
pizzabestellung.de 750 EUR
onlineslots.de 750 EUR
tourists.ch 750 USD
sex-in-berlin.de 749 EUR
groomed.co.uk 700 GBP
lockerz.fr 700 EUR
Other
hypothek.net 9,825 EUR
clicks.net 9,599 USD
dental.travel 2,295 USD
pharmacytechnicians.net 2,200 USD
bajarjuegos.org 2,100 EUR
newsworks.org 2,028 USD
heaters.org 2,000 USD
enfant.info 2,000 EUR
kchen.org 1,750 EUR
relaxation.net 1,549 USD
waytohealth.org 1,500 USD
girokontovergleich.org 1,500 EUR
citytour.net 1,500 USD
assetallocation.net 1,275 USD
graaf.net 1,200 EUR
isdi.org 1,183 USD
vinyl.info 1,100 EUR
220.org 1,000 USD
whistle.biz 1,000 GBP
file.biz 1,000 USD
onlinecoupon.org 1,000 USD
designliving.net 995 USD
steamcleaners.org 949 USD
mediasports.net 888 USD
plo.net 850 USD
florida24.biz 750 EUR
roos.biz 700 EUR
kreditkarten-vergleich.org 700 EUR
bags.eu 1000 EUR
onlinecoupon.org 1000 USD
barrie.tv 1000 USD
designliving.net 995 USD
steamcleaners.org 949 USD
mediasports.net 888 USD
umzug-muenchen.de 875 EUR
plo.net 850 USD
proled.hu 838 USD
schler.eu 810 EUR
kulturstudier.dk 800 USD
steuererkl䲵ng.eu 800 EUR
bs.vg 800 USD
designglas.de 800 EUR
businesschannel.tv 800 USD
youtub.co.uk 800 USD
eurotire.cn 800 USD
careerconcept.de 799 EUR
prᣥ.eu 764 EUR
m䮮er.eu 757 EUR
casino.gd 750 GBP
mp5.nl 750 EUR
asx.nl 750 EUR
florida24.biz 750 EUR
pizzabestellung.de 750 EUR
onlineslots.de 750 EUR
tourists.ch 750 USD
sex-in-berlin.de 749 EUR
gnstiger.eu 711 EUR
roos.biz 700 EUR
groomed.co.uk 700 GBP
kreditkarten-vergleich.org 700 EUR
lockerz.fr 700 EUR
As I promised, I will tell one of the stories told to me at Domainfest. This one is 100% true and told to me by one of the playmates I met this week.
This story was told to me by Playmate A as I will call her. About 2 years earlier, Playmate A was at Kendra’s house hanging out. Kendra for those of you that do not know is also a former Playmate, former Hef girlfriend and a reality star. Kendra had scheduled a lunch with a domainer/businessman at a Beverly Hills Hotel. Playmate A wanted to blow it off but Kendra said she couldn’t do that on such late noticed. Playmate A came along with Kendra to lunch. At the meeting, domain names came up. Playmate A said she would love to get her name (.com) but someone has it and it is impossible to find them. After the lunch the domainer said he will find out who owns Playmate A’s domain name and do everything in his power to try and get it back for her.
Nearly 2 hours later playmate A receives a call from the domainer. Remarkably, he tells her that the name is now in her possession. She is shocked and asks how he did it. Well, said the domainer, it turns out that he owned it. It seems that the domainer had recently a purchased package of domains and her name (.com) was part of the package.
Sometime fact is stranger than fiction.
I’m sorry for going dark the last few days. Since there were a number of blogs covering the basics, i.e. the seminars, the auction, etc., I thought I’d wait and recap some of the events and tell some of the interesting stories I heard the past few days.
First, Domainfest was everything I thought it would be and more. Oversee had a first class event and deserves to get recognized for a Tradeshow that represents the needs of the Domaining community. The seminars were targeted to the needs of the domainer. There were seminars on getting domains, SEO and SEM, and new monetization methods among others. The selection of speakers were first rate (not just because I was one). My favorite of the seminars was on SEO and SEM. You can’t do better than having both Danny Sullivan and Bruce Clay on the same panel. Their insight was extremely helpful to me. I plan to go to more of the SEO Tradeshows that they participate in.
The selection of Tony Hsieh was perfect. He told of his starting LinkExchange and selling it to Microsoft for $265,000,000. He detailed the process of building zappos.com into one of onlines largest shoe retailers and his philosophy on making employees part of a family unit.
If I had to highlight just one reason to go to the next Domainfest, it would be the networking. Yes other domain shows like Traffic offer excellent networking, however this show with approximately 1000 attendees trumped the recent Traffic shows where attendance has dropped substantially.
The rumor is that there will be another Domainfest this year in Europe, sometime in September or October.
Tomorrow I will write one of the most amusing stories I heard at Domainfest. I don’t think you’ll hear this story anywhere prior to my posting it on DirectNavigation.com.
FriendFiender Networks, Inc which includes Penthouse is losing lots of money. They can’t pay off creditors so what’s the plan. It’s an IPO of course. According to the WSJ they are looking to raise 200 million in an IPO next week. Recently I saw the off Broadway show Avenue Q. One of the main songs in the show is “the Internet is for porn”(watch it on Youtube).Maybe those puppets know something I don’t.
GreatDomains.com is Sedo’s attempt to run Premium Auctions of Domain Names. While some of the GD auctions in the past have had premium domains auctioned, this is not one of them. Since Sedo is one of the largest domain name sales sites out there, you would think they could truly come up with some Premium Names to sell. However, with Rick Latona doing the Traffic Vegas auction and Moniker handling the Domainfest auction, it looks like Sedo couldn’t enough Premium names to list. On the positive side there are some decent names and low reserves. I just think this was the wrong week for them to have this Month’s GD auction.
I have added to this post the list of GD domains and their reserve so you can judge for yourself.
bnu.com 5,000 – 9,999 $
purchased.com 5,000 – 9,999
afq.com no reserve
zzj.com 1,000 – 4,999
bor.net no reserve
lfw.com 1,000 – 4,999
2a.com 10,000 – 24,999
boot.net 1,000 – 4,999 EUR
ibanks.com 25,000 – 49,999 $US
eqk.com no reserve 100 $US
poh.net 1 – 499 $US 100 $US
3p.com 10,000 – 24,999 $US
fighter.net no reserve 80
heist.net no reserve 80
cowardly.com no reserve
gmh.com 10,000 – 24,999 $US
plo.net 1 – 499 $US 70 $US
tvservices.net no reserve
yib.net no reserve 70 EUR
accentchair.net no reserve
accesslive.com 500 – 999 $US
bladed.com 1 – 499 $US
cellists.com no reserve
cheapmortgage.com
cheesy.net no reserve
citygovernment.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
collectinsurance.com no reserve
collegepin.com no reserve
compareservices.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
coursedescription.com 1 – 499 $US
customcomponents.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
dirtbicycles.com no reserve
ecolodges.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
examine.net 1 – 499 $US
funnymovies.net 1 – 499 $US
gelspray.com 1 – 499 $US
geographicdata.com no reserve
goldfutures.net 1,000 – 4,999 $US
hypnotize.net no reserve
instantescrow.com 1 – 499 $US
lacrossesticks.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
laurie.net 1 – 499 $US
lollies.net 1 – 499 $US
marketingexecutives.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
microwavepasta.com 1 – 499 $US
negotiate.net 1 – 499 $US
offshorejob.com 500 – 999 $US
outfielder.com 1 – 499 $US
pasted.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
practicality.com 1 – 499 $US
purchaseplan.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
relaxation.net 1 – 499 $US
replacementdrive.com 1 – 499 $US
reveals.net no reserve
robbed.com 1 – 499 $US
routine.net 1 – 499 $US
satinbriefs.com 1 – 499 $US
sighting.com 1 – 499 $US
siliconegel.com 1 – 499 $US
snowshovels.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
socialgadgets.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
tedspread.com 1 – 499 $US
travelpasses.com 1,000 – 4,999 $US
websiteresources.com 1 – 499 EUR
yorker.com 1 – 499 $US
zipping.com
Nat Cohen is a long time domainer who specializes in generic domains. This post, which Nat prepared, is one that is important to all domain owners.
About Nat – He has built up many of his Properties including OceanCity.com and Maryland.com. He lives with his wife and family in Washington DC. Nat is a longtime friend.
A Problem at the Core of the Internet
Those who care about the development of the Internet should pay attention to a problem festering at its core. Domain names, the building blocks of the Internet, are governed by such a flimsy, easily-abused set of rules that ownership rights in domain names are not secure. This problem affects both those within and outside the domain industry.
“Going Rogue”
Domains are the only asset class where owners are required to subject their ownership rights to cancellation by an arbitration panel. The poorly paid, loosely accredited arbiters who decide these cases are guided by a vague set of rules, the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy or “UDRP”. There is no procedure for reviewing the decisions of the arbiters to ensure that the decisions comply with the guidelines. Arbiters enjoy free rein in interpreting the rules as they see fit and can act with impunity.
Most arbiters are sincere, fair-minded, hard-working, distinguished legal professionals who make a genuine effort to carefully and faithfully apply the UDRP rules. Yet their good work is undermined by weak procedural safeguards that allow a minority of arbiters to mishandle the power entrusted to them to order the cancellation of a registrant’s rights to a domain name and the transfer of that domain name to a new owner for the flimsiest of reasons.
Individuals and small businesses are losing their long-held domains in arbitration to covetous newcomers who are not entitled to them. Last year a Korean dentist lost opendental.com to a company that did not exist at the time he initially registered the domain. A technology enthusiast recently lost parvi.org to the City of Paris in spite of the arbiter finding that there was no evidence that he registered the domain in bad faith and despite of his clear legitimate use of the domain to promote new software he was developing.
‘Fox Guarding the Henhouse’
Arbiters are selected by providers of arbitration services, primarily WIPO and NAF, and the arbitration venue is in turn selected by the Complainant. WIPO and NAF are competing in the marketplace to offer services to their customers. The customers they are catering to are people or businesses who want domains transferred to them.
WIPO and NAF offer seminars on how to succeed at a UDRP. They offer pre-written complaints where the arguments are made for the complainant and all the complainant has to do is fill in the blanks. They develop supplemental policies heavily tilted in favor of the complainant governing the timing and admissibility of initial and follow-up submissions. A new entrant, the Czech Arbitration Court, has offered to aggressively lower the cost of a complaint to attract Complainants raising the question as to the quality of the panelists willing to work on an assembly line system churning out mass produced decisions at the lowest cost. One of the original arbitration providers, eResolution, stopped offering arbitration services after complaining that WIPO created a perception in the marketplace that Complainants were more likely to win cases at WIPO than at eResolution which led to a steep drop in the number of Complainants who selected eResolution as an arbitration venue. The NAF has been found to be biased in favor of credit card companies and has been banned from deciding credit card disputes, yet ICANN still empowers them to decide domain name arbitrations. Competitive pressures will increasingly push the arbitration venues to lower standards and to adopt ever more pro-Complainant policies, or see themselves shut out of the market.
These problems are not new. The ‘systematic unfairness in the ICANN UDRP’ was detailed in a thoroughly researched paper by Professor Michael Geist published in — 2001. One promising idea to reduce bias is to randomly assign cases to the different arbitration bodies. Yet no concerted effort has been made to correct the problem of bias and now, ten years after the introduction of the UDRP, the problem is as bad as it has ever been.
Mission Creep
The UDRP was intended to deal with clear cases of cybersquatting. Over time, due to panels willing to accommodate aggressive complainants, the standard is moving closer to ‘use it or lose it’ where panelists will order the transfer of a domain to whom they believe to be the “more deserving” party. Arbiters are issuing decisions stating to the Respondent, in essence, ‘you knew that the Complainant had a good use for the domain and you weren’t using it, so your continuing to hold and renew the domain is evidence of bad faith’. This line of reasoning was used in ordering the transfer of OpenDental.com, as mentioned above, and DKB.com, where one bank had stopped using a domain that another bank wanted.
The NAF acknowledged this broadening of the scope of the UDRP in a comment letter:
Panelists have taken the opportunity, over time, to agree with those complainants and broaden the scope of the UDRP, but it started out as a mechanism only for clear cut cases of cybersquatting.
The erosion of the original UDRP protections are decried by panelist Diane Cabell in a dissent:
Today, many panels will find proof of all three of the Policy’s elements simply from the existence of a mark of any kind with arguments that any mark is by definition identical or confusingly similar, that any use by any party other than a mark owner can only be illegitimate, and that bad faith necessarily exists if there is no legitimate interest.
That takes us back to the beginning, which I find disheartening.
The combination of the broader scope of the UDRP and arbiters who freely reinterpret the UDRP guidelines are putting at risk generic domains that were registered with no bad faith intent. The levees have been breached and many previously protected domains will be washed away in a flood of speculative UDRP complaints.
Bad Faith
Absent a finding of bad faith, a panelist may not order the transfer of a domain name. Most UDRP disputes turn on whether the registrant exhibited bad faith in her registration and use of the disputed domain. Bad faith is a question of intent. To determine bad faith requires looking into the soul of the person who registered the domain to determine her intention at the time of registration – which may have occurred a decade prior to the UDRP proceeding. UDRP proceedings are particularly ill suited for determining ‘bad faith’ as the evidentiary record is so slight. There is no opportunity for discovery, to examine witnesses under oath, or similar fact finding powers that are available in a court trial.
Often the only evidence supporting a finding of bad faith are ad links provided by a third party to whom the domain has been licensed. Arbiters will rely on the existence of these links to make the ‘reasonable inference’ that the original intention of the domain owner in registering a valuable generic domain years earlier was primarily to profit from such links, even though the links may have first appeared years after the original registration. On such reasoning valuable generic domains that have been held for years without problem are suddenly lost.
Anything.com has one of the best generic portfolios in the world. They have been registering generic domains since at least 1997 and registered flamingo.com in 1998 before monetization of domains through pay-per-click advertising had gotten off the ground. Four years later in 2002, the Flamingo Hotel in Las Vegas filed a UDRP objecting to links on the parking page at flamingo.com. In spite of Anything.com’s arguments that they registered flamingo.com simply because it was a generic domain, and in spite of one panelist’s dissent that the links did not prove that the domain was registered in bad faith four years earlier, the other panelists determined the links “to more than adequately support an inference regarding Respondent’s intention on registering the disputed domain name”. The Flamingo Hotel won.
In a more recent example, Bigfoot Ventures, a company with far-flung media interests, purchased several three-letter dot-com domains from BuyDomains in May 2008. BuyDomains had owned many of these domain for several years prior to the sale. At the end of May 2008, the same month that Bigfoot had acquired the domains and before it had even switched the hosting for the domains, Bigfoot was hit by a UDRP Complaint. The Complainant was a Mexican Airline known by the initials VTP and the domain the airline wanted was vtp.com. The arbiter found that the presence of advertising links on the webpage that predated Bigfoot’s purchase of the domain was evidence of Bigfoot’s bad faith. Shortly after Bigfoot spent $40,000 to acquire vtp.com, the panelist ordered its rights to the domain canceled and the domain transferred to the Mexican airline.
Cases like these show how valuable generic domains can be lost due to dubious reasoning resting on the slimmest of evidence.
‘Punishment fit the crime’
The only remedy available through the UDRP is draconian – the cancellation of all rights to the domain, usually combined with the order to transfer the domain to the complaining entity. There is no option available to allow the domain owner to cure any problem, no option to pay a monetary penalty, no temporary loss of use. The only penalty, no matter how minor the injury done, or even when there is no injury, is the utter loss of rights in the domain.
A thought experiment using a brick and mortar example may help clarify the situation. Imagine a longtime lot owner whose landscaping company plants a sign on her property that might violate the Home Owner Association (HOA) rules of her community. Then imagine that when the neighbor living in the house adjacent to the lot complains, the HOA transfers ownership of the lot to the neighbor with no compensation due to the lot owner. Far fetched? Similar outcomes are occurring regularly under the UDRP.
Admittedly this example is not that accurate. To make it more accurate the neighbor would choose the person deciding whether the sign violated the HOA rules from several people each of whom promotes himself as being more Complainant friendly than the previous one. Further, the HOA would make no effort to police the arbiters to ensure that they are actually deciding cases according to the HOA rules. Now you have a more accurate model of how the UDRP operates.
Would you want to live and invest in this neighborhood? Of course not. This would be the last place you would want to put your money.
The Morality of Speculation
Certain panelists appear to view investment in domain names as inherently bad faith. Their perspective appears to be that any value associated from an undeveloped domain must be due to a parasitic attempt to profit from the legitimate development activity of others. Therefore in a dispute where the Complainant is actively making use of a term while the Respondent is merely parking a domain similar to that term, then the inference is drawn that the parking activity is a bad faith attempt to profit from the Complainant’s business activities. The panelists who hold this view do not appear to give credence to the possibility that domains have inherent value due to their generic meaning, or that these generic domains will attract direct navigation traffic.
This view is articulated in the dissent in the Geometric.com case (in which I was the Respondent). In the panelist’s words:
Respondent engages in the business strategy of choosing words or phrases commonly used in commerce…
The majority opinion concludes that the Respondent did not have actual knowledge of this specific Complainant at the time Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Name and that any subsequent actions of Respondent are irrelevant. No consideration has been given to the artful strategy underlying Respondent’s activities.
Unfortunately, I cannot join my distinguished colleagues in approving Respondent’s actions without an analysis focusing on the underlying strategy.
I understand this panelist’s position to be that if the underlying strategy is to speculatively register domains with the intent to profit – in general – from the value created by others, then the strategy employed is illegitimate and the registration is fundamentally in bad faith – irrespective of the specific facts of the particular case. Should the registration be challenged in a UDRP by a company making commercial use of the term on which the disputed domain is based then the domain registration must be canceled – not because the registration targeted the particular Complainant in bad faith, but because the strategy of speculative registration is itself evidence of bad faith.
This view undermines the entire industry that has been built around investment in domain names. If domain names are not viewed as having inherent value, then any speculative registration must be an attempt to profit from value created by others. In this view, every speculative registration is in bad faith and must be canceled by any party who meets the test of having a common law or registered trademark that is similar to the domain name.
This position has a moralistic tone. Speculation is evil is the underlying moral principle. This view allows panelists to cast themselves as modern-day Robin Hoods, wresting a domain from the clutches of greedy speculators to deliver it safely into the hands of an upstanding business that can put the domain to honest, productive use.
Speculation draws criticism wherever it occurs whether the market is foreign currency, stocks or domain names. Speculation serves a purpose in keeping the markets for oil, gold, pork bellies and other commodities fluid and in setting prices so that farmers and natural resource companies can sell on the futures market goods that don’t yet exist and thereby obtain a steady, predictable income while transferring all the risk to the speculators.
The critics overlook that investment and speculation are often the first stage of development. Before a city exists someone has to own the land. Someone has to take their hard earned cash and speculate that the raw land will someday be worth something. Then someone else will speculate that people will want to live in that location and will buy the land, subdivide it, clear the land, and put in roads and utilities. Then builders may come to build homes ‘on spec’ – on speculation – and build a house with no guaranty of a sale in the hopes that someone will want to live there. The city that eventually grows on what was once raw land would never have existed if it hadn’t been for speculative activity at every stage of development.
In the early days of the Internet, speculators depleted their savings to spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars on new-fangled intangible things called domain names that most people thought were worthless. They paid millions of dollars to the domain registry and registrars who in turn used that money to strengthen the infrastructure of the Internet and to market the benefit of domain ownership and to promote the advantages of doing business online. To meet the demand created by the early investors, tools were developed to simplify web site building and to ease the transition of commerce to the Internet. The critical mass of domain ownership made possible by the purchases of speculators jump started the Internet economy. The speculators that risked their life savings because of their faith in the future of the Internet are now losing what they risked so much to acquire due to certain arbiters who view speculation as illegitimate.
Conclusion
The entire system, from the lack of oversight from ICANN, to the pro-Complainant bias exhibited by WIPO, NAF and the other arbitration providers, to panelists who substitute their personal views for the agreed language of the UDRP, fails to protect the domain owner and leads to loss of confidence in ownership rights on the Internet. The combined actions, and inaction, of these groups are like termites eating away at the foundation of a house. If left uncorrected, the house will collapse. The growth of the domain industry requires stronger protection of domain name registration rights.
Acknowledgements
This article is largely based on original research and revealing articles by Andrew Allemann at DomainNameWire.com and Mike Berkens at TheDomains.com. The ideas in this articles are not original and have been stated in one form or another by many different people, in a variety of venues, over many years. Jeremiah Johnson and Phil Corwin at the ICA are battling huge odds to protect the interest of domain owners. Several lawyers are on the front lines representing domain owners in UDRP disputes, among them Ari Goldberger, John Berryhill, Paul Keating, Brett Lewis, Stevan Lieberman, and Zak Muscovitch. Thanks to Larry Fischer for the opportunity to post here. A big thank you to the dedicated panelists who do their best to maintain the integrity of the UDRP process and who deliver fair, well-reasoned decisions.
I usually watch Jon Stewart’s Daily Show. Its a late night show on The Comedy Central Network. He is a well known comedian who has also hosted many award shows. Recently he was interviewing a guest and they were speaking about another show’s host stepping down. He jokingly wanted to claim that spot. In his analogy he compares domain drops to this situation. He compares the situation by saying ” This is like a URL, a Domain Name, that has been given back. I am claiming it.” It’s kind of cool when a major talk show host uses domain name drops to compare situations to. Well done Jon.
Have you received an offer for a domain you own and wondered if the offer is worth responding to. Do you wonder if the offer is real or if it is someone spamming out multiple offers. A few years back I noticed the site DomainSpammers.com. It only listed a few names at the time but I had received offer emails from most of the email addresses that the site’s owner had listed as spam. The list has increased over time. I’m not sure if it’s up to date or if all emails listed there are actual spammers. However based on my past experience, it seems like a good list to compare any email offers you have received. This way you can make your own decision before responding.
per the site:
“DomainSpammers.com tracks all suspected Spam and Scam activity related to domain names and encourages best practices among domainers. This site is designed to help domain owners gauge the legitimacy of emails being sent based on what other owners have received. Any registered user can submit a suspected spammer to let other owners know where potential spam offers and scams are coming from. Being listed here does not necessarily mean one is a spammer or scammer, this site only serves as a warning about the emailing habits of people and companies. Click on any person to view the full info page and comments.”
There are some sites that offer information. Other websites purely look to make money. But sometimes you just don’t see the obvious benefits of owning a primary generic domain. Take Jesus.com. It was owned many years ago by a different owner than it’s owned by today.
The owner of Jesus.com stated that “young women interested in sharing a shower with Jesus can now have their dreams come true.” The site included links such as Date Jesus (who by the way according to his resume likes “Long romantic walks, lying on a grassy field at night gazing into the stars”, “shower with Jesus”, “sermons” ” multimedia”,”music” and “contact”.
Also included is the following “All requests from young women in the DC Metro area will be considered. Women from out of town will have to handle their own travel provisions, though a guest room is often available if needed. In most cases Jesus will be available and eager to speak to you about spirituality if desired. If you are not spiritual, Jesus will share a beer and pleasant existential banter.”
to see the old version of the site click here
« Newer Posts —
Older Posts »