James Iles

Razer Upgrades from RazerZone.com to Razer.com: Legal Battle Revealed

Views:
1,183
Comments:
21
By James Iles, Nov 16, 2017
  1. James Iles

    James Iles NamePros Writer PRO Business Account VIP Trusted Blogger

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2009
    Posts:
    1,234
    Likes Received:
    9,630
    A leading lifestyle brand for gamers, Razer, has been one of the most popular companies on Crunchbase over the past few years. Having raised a total of $175 million in funding including a $50 million round in May 2017, the company has grown in popularity and now boasts a user base of around 35 million.

    Razer managed to acquire the @Razer username for popular social networks such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. However, the company's domain name was the longer RazerZone.com. Until recently, the shorter Razer.com was owned by a Chinese individual with the domain name being used for many years to host a website containing glassware.

    Based on our research, it looks as though Razer may have made an attempt to acquire Razer.com via the Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre. According to a report from West.cn (China), Razer unsuccessfully tried to acquire the domain by filing a dispute.

    In another report on a Chinese forum, it shows that Razer made a 100,000 CNY offer for the domain (around $15,000) in March 2015, before the owner eventually responded with a price of 1.5 million CNY (around $225,000). According to the report, the asking price eventually dropped to 800,000 CNY ($120,000).

    It seems that after hearing this price, Razer filed a failed dispute with the Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre. The company seems to have initially filed a URS dispute, which failed due to the fact that the URS dispute system doesn't apply to .COM domain names.

    Razer went on to file UDRP, which was approved and subsequently resolved in January 2016. According to the report, the domain name was due to be transferred to Razer with the following comment from the panel (translated into English):

    As a side note, it is concerning, that UDRP case number HK-1500822 isn't available to view on the ADNDRC website.

    According to Archive.org, Razer.com hosted the glassware company's website up until September 2017, but on September 16th 2017, a new message was displayed along with several images that weren't archived, unfortunately. Roughly translated, the message reads:


    As of November 2017, DomainIQ shows the domain name moved into the possession of Razer (Asia-Pacific) Pte. Ltd, and currently forwards to RazerZone.com.

    The transfer of Razer.com to Razer (Asia-Pacific) Pte. Ltd coincides with the company's IPO, in which they raised a total of $500 million.

    Thanks to @GeorgeK for his help with this article.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2017
    The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
  2. Next Article
    Top Topics: Shane Cultra’s AMA; How Much Would You Sell Your Portfolio For?…
    Previous Article
    Ultra-Premium Monkey.com Returns to Original Owner
  3. Loading...
  4. James Iles

    About The Author — James Iles

    Writer for NamePros.com, domain name investor and broker. For all inquiries relating to stories and interviews, please email: [email protected]

    This is James Iles's 474th blog post on NamePros. View all blog posts

    Home Page:
    http://twitter.com/jamesiles
    Actions:
    Follow
  5. Comments (21)

  6. Skyvisum

    Skyvisum Active Member VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2014
    Posts:
    974
    Likes Received:
    972
    Greedy company.They have the money to pay but decided to take a short cut.I'm disappointed with companies like these.They grew big and expect to pay peanut for another man's asset.
     
  7. hxp

    hxp SuperDuperUltraRarePremiumHolographic Member VIP

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2015
    Posts:
    2,361
    Likes Received:
    4,971
    I'm surprised the previous registrant wasn't able to better defend himself? ...What did he do wrong? :S
     
  8. anantj

    anantj Active Member VIP

    Joined:
    May 7, 2016
    Posts:
    2,558
    Likes Received:
    2,099
    Agreed with @Skyvisum This should have been a RDNH ruling imo! Too bad for the original registrant of Razer.com
     
  9. jstenn13

    jstenn13 UltraDomains.com NamePros Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2016
    Posts:
    500
    Likes Received:
    376
    What a shame. Add Razer to the list of companies that I'll choose not to interact with as a consumer.
     
  10. DomainVP

    DomainVP Domain Expert Business Account VIP

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2013
    Posts:
    3,169
    Likes Received:
    11,444
    I can only speculate that the domain may have been used for parking, and was displaying ads related to the RazerZone use in commerce.

    If the site was pulled and was discussing a legal battle, and the aforementioned statement was the only content, it just might be that the Razer glass company had taken down their website and parked it previous to the UDRP.

    This is one of the major points that I have seen override domain ownership that predates a TM.

    If you are parked and not demonstrating any use before a UDRP is filed then it puts you in bad spot for demonstrating use and avoiding a 'bad faith' finding.

    Terrible decision for the domain owner, but if you are caught unprepared then this will happen every time - and companies know that now.

    Domain owners should know this too, stop parking your valuable property with ads unless it's generic and tailored to avoid TM collision/violation.
     
  11. Constantin S

    Constantin S BRANDUE.COM VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2014
    Posts:
    2,852
    Likes Received:
    5,193
    Wow, you got an incredible portfolio. Yhea...sad how such companies decide to do business, I personally have a Razer headset, it's my 2nd but I'll probably move to philips or sony next year.
     
  12. James Iles

    James Iles NamePros Writer PRO Business Account VIP Trusted Blogger

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2009
    Posts:
    1,234
    Likes Received:
    9,630
    No parking involved as far as I can tell
     
  13. DomainVP

    DomainVP Domain Expert Business Account VIP

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2013
    Posts:
    3,169
    Likes Received:
    11,444
    Bizarre. Looking forward to reading this brief.

    Great post James, please update when you come across additional info.
     
  14. creataweb

    creataweb Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2005
    Posts:
    3,285
    Likes Received:
    2,897
  15. jstenn13

    jstenn13 UltraDomains.com NamePros Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2016
    Posts:
    500
    Likes Received:
    376
    Thanks. Trying to build it one name at a time :)
     
  16. bashariqbal

    bashariqbal Established Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2013
    Posts:
    369
    Likes Received:
    193
    Not clear why the respondent lost the UDRP.
     
  17. j2tuff911

    j2tuff911 TheDomainBaron Business Account

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Posts:
    2,176
    Likes Received:
    837
    Interesting article, good info!
     
  18. arjun29

    arjun29 Established Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Posts:
    637
    Likes Received:
    369
    Money talks... maybe
     
  19. platey

    platey Active Member VIP

    Joined:
    May 21, 2016
    Posts:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    1,779
    If I own a car and put it in a garage etc and choose to store this car in a garage etc the car would still be mine this day, next year next century etc etc

    Just because I done want to use this car every single day does not make this car someone else's property just because they want to buy this car more than I want to sell it eg I refuse to sell it etc

    More and more we are seeing no not being no and it will only get worse

    Many of us have been about either in the domain name industry or were able to buy a domain name at the start of the domain name industry etc if we either knew about domain names or not etc

    But people who were not born until all the good domains were acquired cheaply if not initially for free etc dont like the fact that they can't have everything as sometimes the best version of what they want is owned by someone else and is most definitely Not for sale at any price

    And they just can't get their head around it the fact that someone already owns something they want but can't have so they have to resort to other measures

    The udrp process should be scrapped as it's being used to take digital property from its rightful owners

    The udrp process is effectively a way to get a person what isn't theirs from someone who doesn't want to sell

    Oh and so is using lawyers to open past bankruptcy 's etc to get what isn't for sale

    Modern society
     
  20. DomainVP

    DomainVP Domain Expert Business Account VIP

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2013
    Posts:
    3,169
    Likes Received:
    11,444
    With UDRP proceedings, what 'should be' is addressed in the working groups that are held in order to perfect the process.

    Using parking links to justify bad faith, and invalidate fair use, is a tactic complainants have in their arsenal.

    Domain owners need to be aware of this, and defend themselves by being aware of existing TMs and taking a 'good faith' strategy to avoid confusion.

    I don't know if this was the reason for the decision, but typically links to 'similar products' and creation of confusion are reasons why a responding domain owner would lose the domain when the domain was owned before a TM exists and had actual use.

    Looking forward to reading the brief.
     
  21. jideofor

    jideofor Active Member VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Posts:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    2,964
    IMO, UDRP should be scrapped.
     
  22. Crysis

    Crysis Established Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2011
    Posts:
    243
    Likes Received:
    876
    So..What do you propose, instead of UDRP?
     
  23. platey

    platey Active Member VIP

    Joined:
    May 21, 2016
    Posts:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    1,779
    Common sense lol much preferred
     
  24. Crysis

    Crysis Established Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2011
    Posts:
    243
    Likes Received:
    876
    Lol...
    You are only thinking from domainer's point of view. Just try to think from Trademark owner's point of view. I am not talking Razer.com but in general, most UDRP cases are won by the Complainant and if you read those decisions, you will come to the conclusion that most of the times Respondent register domain names which are clearly abusive.

    John Berryhill has given a nice explanation here:

    https://www.namepros.com/threads/another-udrp-win-by-abdulbasit-com-with-howard-neu.1049114/

     
  25. platey

    platey Active Member VIP

    Joined:
    May 21, 2016
    Posts:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    1,779
    That as may be but it's very naive to think that just because they may not want that particular name because they prefer the domain they use than the domain that may infringe trademark that they don't want etc more often than not the domain that infringes trademark won't just sit on the digital shelf doing cartwheels to occupy itself as it will usually be bought by someone

    Filing udrp's for fun is an odds game in as much as it's only a matter of time before a person files a udrp against someone that knows their mustard in the domain name industry and the trademark sector of law and fancies playing the udrp filer at their own game for a laugh just to watch the udrp filer back peddle their way out of a situation they instigated whilst paying significant legal fees and compensation in the process - all good fun

    Udrp's are a two way street

    You may go in to the street thinking you are the biggest vehicle in the street only to find a bigger vehicle tan you that you have to give way to

    Such is life
     
  26. jberryhill

    jberryhill Top Member John Berryhill, Ph.d., Esq. VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Posts:
    1,584
    Likes Received:
    1,225
    You capture an important point in there.

    Too often, there is "park"/"don't park" advice, which is too simple.

    Parking a domain name with content related to the generic/descriptive aspects of the domain name is a legitimate use of the domain name.

    It's not a question of whether the domain name is or is not parked. It's a question of HOW it is parked.
     
Topics / Tags:
Loading...