discuss Unique idea to help grow domain industry

I think its a nice coop like idea and charitable idea, but not sure what financial level one needs to be invested in to be applicable. I think as a group this seems pretty fragmented as to who pays and who benefits, and there are “tiers”.

Can you guys post some example UDRP’s where this occured to a lack of funds?

When you say “vulnerable”, how can say someone newer have high value names worthy of a UDRP? (Names worth more than say $2-4k?). What am I missing? Are there that many low net worth, yet hidden one word owner domainers here I don’t know about? Does vulnerable include people who have large portfolios and struggle on renewals because they are bad managers of expenses and over-extended? Liquidity in business is key.

From all my studying, seems people on this forum have typical $2-3k or less value type 2 word names, bought for say $8-$200. For me, Not worth paying $4k to defend a name I paid $2k-$4k for yet say is worth $20k when (or if) ever sold, at least in my pragmatic view. I would let it go. To me, that’s life, it’s risk of doing business and $$$.

I have collected a few one word dot com’s too, but I would not spend big money to defend, nor ask for any charity or help, personally I am self supporting.

Then you have those investor/speculators who get in financial trouble over buying too many names and can’t pay renewals or wait until last minute to renew. They complain here about losing a name for $8, not on auto renew.
Do you consider helping those over extended domainers candidates? To me that is mismanagement, and they should not be rewarded.

Then we have a number of liquid or LLL owners, or long time investors like you guys who have posted above. All seem to me can afford paying a lawyer.

Seems to me that this audience is for those who have high value portfolios. Right? Aren’t the egregious UDRP’s you mention mostly on high value one word or LLL type domains?

If so, aren’t those investors, “well heeled” investors who can afford to defend themselves?

Or Like France dot com, I would donate for that cause since its crazy, and maybe registrant not a wealthy guy, but ... fighting against a Gov’t? Seems naive and is expensive to fight that unless you are a lawyer. I am sure though egregious, it’s not a candidate for the plan due to huge costs.

In the case of ADO, it was owned by a domain blog and veteran, and assume had sufficient funds to take to court with an IP lawyer in VA.

If hit with a frivolous UDRP, from some arrogant Corporation I probably would walk away as I don’t want to spend lots of money to defend it when I paid that same amount for a domain. Why pay double? Nor would I want to ask for help, I am too proud and independent.

There are UDRP’s that are not defended that are ruled in favor of the registrant too, if the registrant followed the 3 rules.

I would have joined the ICA if it were not that expensive and had a bigger portfolio.

I dont see activity from anyone here in this thread, (that I am aware) on the RPM ICANN list (I follow as observer) and @GeorgeK is the only real domain investor highly involved, meanwhile all the IP lawyers gang up on him.

urlurl said:

actually, a better model would be if a member wanted to participate they would reg what names they wanted to be protected and pay a small fee per year (say $0.15-$.25) per name, the names would be reviewed by the panel to exclude obvious TM names.

in the event a UDRP case came up the names would be represented to be defended.

Click to expand...

It is an interesting idea, but something completely different. It is essentially insurance.
It would only work on a massive scale really.

The problem with that is not everything carries the same risk, so it would be hard to have a blanket amount without a lot of statistical analysis.

There are many other factors like -

1.) Who owns the domain. Having a bunch of lost UDRP is a higher risk.
2.) What is done with the domain. Stuff like serving related ads, or pitching domains proactively carries more risk.
3.) What type of domain it is. Some formats are much more likely to be disputed.

On top of that there are logistical issues when it comes to collecting such modest payments. If it was something a large registrar offered it might make more sense at the time of collecting payment.

I personally see more use for an organization that is there to defend the most egregious abuses on a case by case basis, not just any random UDRP.

Brad

Josh R said:

I would join the ICA if they helped defend flagrant UDRP filings. Simple as that.

Click to expand...

I think this is something they have been doing for a long time, albeit in an indirect way. They are long-time critics of the flaws of UDRP.

I prefer to tackle the problem at the root, and lobby for improving the process (ie improving selection of panelists and eliminating conflicts of interest). Here we are talking about mitigating consequences.

First of all, I don't think this is such a big problem. How many domainers have been threatened with/lost a UDRPs unfairly ? I know only a few. For example Telepathy and they have the means to defend themselves. ADO is a good example although it's not all black and white. It was tricky and the process was stretched to the limit imho, so there certainly is value in retaining lawyers for cases like this.

But the vast majority of UDRP cases are settled adequately. Some rulings are debatable but respondents lose by default because they do not reply. You do not need a lawyer, you can defend yourself. Not having a lawyer is not an excuse for doing nothing.

Next, I am not sure how much it really cost to hire a lawyer for this kind of dispute (never been there), but it probably costs less to have a lawyer write a response than file the UDRP itself. Call me cynical, but being hit with a UDRP is something that can happen to you if you have coveted domain names. You have money to buy and renew domains but no money to defend them ?
Even if it's not fair, it could be viewed as a cost of doing business, and provisioned as such for accounting purposes.

Many of the companies I have among my clients have lawyers, and are currently involved in disputes of some kind, such as labor or commercial lawsuits. It's a fact of life, it happens wherever there are assets at stake, it's not just a domaining thing.

I am thinking along the lines of @offthehandle, the domainers who own valuable domain names are normally not the poorest and can mount adequate defense.

So what is the target group here ? People who own great names but for some reason are too poor to defend themselves ? People don't normally file UDRPs or sue for bad names, they do because a) the names are good or b) because of TM/copyright issues.

Kate said:

I think this is something they have been doing for a long time, albeit in an indirect way. They are long-time critics of the flaws of UDRP.

I prefer to tackle the problem at the root, and lobby for improving the process (ie improving selection of panelists and eliminating conflicts of interest). Here we are talking about mitigating consequences.

First of all, I don't think this is such a big problem. How many domainers have been threatened with/lost a UDRPs unfairly ? I know only a few. For example Telepathy and they have the means to defend themselves. ADO is a good example although it's not all black and white. It was tricky and the process was stretched to the limit imho, so there certainly is value in retaining lawyers for cases like this.

But the vast majority of UDRP cases are settled adequately. Some rulings are debatable but respondents lose by default because they do not reply. You do not need a lawyer, you can defend yourself. Not having a lawyer is not an excuse for doing nothing.

Next, I am not sure how much it really cost to hire a lawyer for this kind of dispute (never been there), but it probably costs less to have a lawyer write a response than file the UDRP itself. Call me cynical, but being hit with a UDRP is something that can happen to you if you have coveted domain names. You have money to buy and renew domains but no money to defend them ?
Even if it's not fair, it could be viewed as a cost of doing business, and provisioned as such for accounting purposes.

Many of the companies I have among my clients have lawyers, and are currently involved in disputes of some kind, such as labor or commercial lawsuits. It's a fact of life, it happens wherever there are assets at stake, it's not just a domaining thing.

I am thinking along the lines of @offthehandle, the domainers who own valuable domain names are normally not the poorest and can mount adequate defense.

So what is the target group here ? People who own great names but for some reason are too poor to defend themselves ? People don't normally file UDRPs or sue for bad names, they do because a) the names are good or b) because of TM/copyright issues.

Click to expand...

I don't know. Nissan.com owner was not poor but the legal proceedings have costed him millions. Of course, it was not UDRP, so maybe the insurance should cover potential legal expenses as well to certain limit.

That said, single IP lawyer could provide this as an insurance service if it is only about UDRP. For example, he/she could charge $10-20/name with protection kicking in 1-3 months after the payment (so that you don't buy it when you are already hit), plus $200-300 when you are actually using his service for an insured name.

I would personally choose top 100 most valuable in my opinion names and pay for them.

the best way to determine the rate would be the % of UDRP cases x the cost to fight a UDRP

so 0.01% x $3000 = $.30 per name per year - (these are just made up numbers, i have no idea what the rate is or how much it would cost)

rates then can be adjusted based person to person and how many cases they have had in the past.

having a 3-6 month grace period is also a good idea

and as i said before, names with TM or names that have similar key words to lost UDRP's would be excluded.

offthehandle said:

When you say “vulnerable”, how can say someone newer have high value names worthy of a UDRP? (Names worth more than say $2-4k?). What am I missing? Are there that many low net worth, yet hidden one word owner domainers here I don’t know about? Does vulnerable include people who have large portfolios and struggle on renewals because they are bad managers of expenses and over-extended?

Click to expand...

What I said has absolutely zero to do with domain renewal /asset mismanagement. Not sure how you made that inference.

When I say "vulnerable" I am implying anyone hit with a UDRP that does not have the wherewithal to defend a UDRP. Doesn't just have to be someone new to the domaining scene. Doesn't even have to be a domain investor either. Could very well be someone with a language barrier or perhaps someone that is an end user.

But yes, new domain purchasers /first-time UDRP recipients, are the most at risk. They tend not to be exposed and/or well-versed on the wealth of knowledge, resources, and help at their disposal.

Regarding high value domains, someone doesn't even have to own a 1-word name for it to hold value. Could be a 2-word domain of considerable value (worth $5K +). Then again, this someone could own a 1-word name (also worth more than $5K), if they have money to spend right off the bat. Regardless, either domain name may have a UDRP filed against the rightful owner.

As you may know, any domain can be subject to a UDRP. If one made a large investment (by their standards) in a domain only to see it get snatched by someone with deep-pockets because that someone knows they can, how do you think most folks on the receiving end would feel? I can tell you they won't be jumping up and down or singing kumbaya around a campfire.

Everyone deserves a fighting chance, or at least to have some UDRP panel/counsel decide collectively if there is a plausible case that merits consideration and is worth pursuing. That's all I'm saying.

If the ICA have not been able to move the needle then there should be someone to step up and fill the void, or at least try.

offthehandle said:

For me, Not worth paying $4k to defend a name I paid $2k-$4k for yet say is worth $20k when (or if) ever sold, at least in my pragmatic view. I would let it go. To me, that’s life, it’s risk of doing business and $$$.

Click to expand...

You have every right to do so, but that is a case of "domain depreciation". That's almost as bad as "domain mismanagement" that you were complaining about.

Hustling said:

Kind of reminds me of one of those personal defense attorney commercials, where they say, something like, "you don't pay unless we win". Maybe the same could be applied to your proposition.

Click to expand...

Or we can also amend something like the responded for which our IP lawyer have successfully defended is not actually obliged to pay any sum of money but if in future possible, can donate any amount which will help someone else in defending.

urlurl said:

actually, a better model would be if a member wanted to participate they would reg what names they wanted to be protected and pay a small fee per year (say $0.15-$.25) per name, the names would be reviewed by the panel to exclude obvious TM names.

in the event a UDRP case came up the names would be represented to be defended.

Click to expand...

This can be added as clause but with only for those who can genuinely afford. I think there are domainers who play with a very limited budget and have gathered few hundred domains or even let's say 1000. So paying $.25 per domain yearly doesn't sounds too good. Though you haven't mentioned whether it should be yearly or one time.

AbdulBasit.com said:

Or we can also amend something like the responded for which our IP lawyer have successfully defended is not actually obliged to pay any sum of money but if in future possible, can donate any amount which will help someone else in defending.

Click to expand...

Do you mean to say money from one IP lawyer is given to another prospective IP lawyer, so that this second IP lawyer may be able to take on a future case & defend a client?

If so, wouldn't this 1st IP lawyer want some monetary return for the time spent successfully defending?

Hustling said:

Do you mean to say money from one IP lawyer is given to another prospective IP lawyer, so that this second IP lawyer may be able to take on a future case & defend a client?

If so, wouldn't this 1st IP lawyer want some monetary return for the time spent successfully defending?

Click to expand...

Sorry for my bad English. But what I actually meant is any respondent for whom our IP lawyer have successfully defended the case, the respondent can donate any amount in future if possible to the management who's handling all this. The funds will be used for next case and respondent coming our way which will be first approved by the panel members.

We'll have a lawyer on panel who usually charges let's suppose $1500 for responding but when he joins us, he/she will charge around $1000 and lawyer will be paid from that collected donations.

Have I made things clear now?

Jv1999 said:

Doesn't it cost 1k to file a udrp?

Are frivolous, troll udrps really common?
It was my assumption that most udrps are righteous, in that a domainer did something wrong, like buy non-generic tm... or buy a generic tm that had ads for the tm holder or something loke that

Click to expand...

As far as I'm aware, it costs $1500 for filing UDRP and going with default 1 member panel. But if complainant or respondent wish to have 3 member panel, then each of them pays additional $$$.

I was hit with 4 UDRPs to date. Lost 2 and won 2. Didn't respond in the first 2 losses majorly because I didn't have enough funds. I'm okay to admit what was my situation so I can understand the situation of others as well. One of the domain I lost - https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=D2013-1959 is clear that had I responded, things would've been different... at least IMO.

Excerpt from the above link:

"the Respondent has not come forward to argue that he has any such rights or legitimate interests, in the face of the Complainant’s prima facie case against him. Following the majority of panel authority on this issue, referred to above, this would by itself be sufficient for the Complainant to establish that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests"

This shows that had I responded, things could've gone my way.

AbdulBasit.com said:

As far as I'm aware, it costs $1500 for filing UDRP and going with default 1 member panel. But if complainant or respondent wish to have 3 member panel, then each of them pays additional $$$.

I was hit with 4 UDRPs to date. Lost 2 and won 2. Didn't respond in the first 2 losses majorly because I didn't have enough funds. I'm okay to admit what was my situation so I can understand the situation of others as well. One of the domain I lost - https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=D2013-1959 is clear that had I responded, things would've been different... at least IMO.

Excerpt from the above link:

"the Respondent has not come forward to argue that he has any such rights or legitimate interests, in the face of the Complainant’s prima facie case against him. Following the majority of panel authority on this issue, referred to above, this would by itself be sufficient for the Complainant to establish that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests"

This shows that had I responded, things could've gone my way.

Click to expand...

Do you think they were picking on you based on your location in Pakistan, that you wouldn't fight back?

When money is involved, it may create all sorts of friction or problems. Actually, there is something we can all do, and it involves no money.

For small investors where a domain is worth less than $5,000, it may not be worth it to hire someone to defend your case. The good news is, there have been cases in the past where the domain owners self defended and own. So, what I suggest is to self educate ourselves so that we can self defend ourselves. What is needed is a general understanding of the UDRP ruling. If not available yet, we can create a section within NP dedicated to analysis of UDRP cases. Also, download the standard UDRP response document. When you read a UDRP case, if you like any part relevant to your situation, copy it to prefill your response document. After a while, you'll have a rich document tailored to your investing situation.

wwwweb said:

Do you think they were picking on you based on your location in Pakistan, that you wouldn't fight back?

Click to expand...

I really don't think so. Because there have been many other domainers outside of this region got similar judgement in their decisions.

But to some extent I'm almost sure that complainants do think and believe that I couldn't afford to pay the legal fees so let's try our luck.

Kassey Lee said:

When money is involved, it may create all sorts of friction or problems. Actually, there is something we can all do, and it involves no money.

For small investors where a domain is worth less than $5,000, it's hardly worth it to hire anyone to defend your case. The good news is, there have been cases in the past where the domain owners self defended and own. So, what I suggest is to self educate ourselves so that we can self defend ourselves. What is needed is a general understanding of the UDRP ruling. If not available yet, we can create a section within NP dedicated to analysis of UDRP cases. Also, download the standard UDRP response document. When you read a UDRP case, if you like any part relevant to your situation, copy it to prefill your response document. After a while, you'll have a rich document tailored to your investing situation.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your suggestion which is worthwhile for those who have good grip on English language and some legal writing skills. When I hired and attorney and responded for my last UDRPs which were successfully defended, I cannot think of risking any of my top domains by responding myself no matter how educated I become after going through all the material and guidance available. But that's just my personal opinion and I strongly recommend anyone to go with professional attorney if you're seriously interested in defending your domain name which is worth a lot to you.

AbdulBasit.com said:

...When I hired and attorney and responded for my last UDRPs which were successfully defended, I cannot think of risking any of my top domains by responding myself no matter how educated I become after going through all the material and guidance available. But that's just my personal opinion and I strongly recommend anyone to go with professional attorney if you're seriously interested in defending your domain name which is worth a lot to you.

Click to expand...

How much did retaining the attorney cost you?

Domains - Wanted said:

How much did retaining the attorney cost you?

Click to expand...

In both cases, the complainant opted for 1 member panel and since I wanted 3 members panel, so needed to pay extra. Total cost was around $3500 including WIPO+attorney fee.

Domains - Wanted said:

How much did retaining the attorney cost you?

Click to expand...

In both cases, the complainant opted for 1 member panel and since I wanted 3 members panel, so need to pay extra. Total cost was around $3500 including WIPO+attorney fees.

I am myself new to this domain business and regularly read about UDRP cases carefully and try to keep my domain portfolio as compliant as possible.But one cannot ignore the fact that no matter how generic/TM free the domain may be,there were and are cases happening in which some org. With handsome money still go after the domain and try to RDNH.The major reasons in IMO for RDNH in such generic and Non-TM domains are;
1) Domain owner is from a Developing country and wouldn't afford to defend it .
2) No financial penalties / consequences even if they fail at RDNH.

I would not mind insuring my domains which are generic in nature for small amount annually to escape UDRP abuse.
It will be still be a great help if we have trusted organization to which domainers can reach out for in geniune cases even if it does not mean for immediate financial support.It can be a good start as a beginning and can immensely help to get word out in domain community that such a specific organization of people exist.

AbdulBasit.com said:

I would like everyone to chime in and give your suggestions and/or feedback.

Click to expand...

It's admirable that you are thinking about helping your fellow domainers, the simplest way that this could be achieved is to ask NamePros to create a special section called “Request For Financial Assistance” .

Any domainer who is facing an unfortunate event can then open a thread in that section and ask for help or donations after explaining the problems that they are facing. This doesn’t have to be limited to defending UDRP only , it can include other situations such as domain theft, legal problems with registrars or registries, or even unexpected or unforeseen events in their personal lives. Each situation can then be evaluated by the members here on a case by case bases to decide whom should be helped. IMO

oldtimer said:

It's admirable that you are thinking about helping your fellow domainers, the simplest way that this could be achieved is to ask NamePros to create a special section called “Request For Financial Assistance” .

Any domainer who is facing an unfortunate event can then open a thread in that section and ask for help or donations after explaining the problems that they are facing. This doesn’t have to be limited to defending UDRP only , it can include other situations such as domain theft, legal problems with registrars or registries, or even unexpected or unforeseen events in their personal lives. Each situation can then be evaluated by the members here on a case by case bases to decide whom should be helped. IMO

Click to expand...

Thanks for your feedback which is appreciated.

However, I'm talking of having bit more organized. Also the funds be already existing when any issue comes up with our fellow domainer. There is very limited time to submit UDRP response and if someone requests at NP so I don't think arranging from funds to lawyer and all that is feasible.

Kassey Lee said:

When money is involved, it may create all sorts of friction or problems. Actually, there is something we can all do, and it involves no money.

For small investors where a domain is worth less than $5,000, it may not be worth it to hire someone to defend your case. The good news is, there have been cases in the past where the domain owners self defended and own. So, what I suggest is to self educate ourselves so that we can self defend ourselves. What is needed is a general understanding of the UDRP ruling. If not available yet, we can create a section within NP dedicated to analysis of UDRP cases. Also, download the standard UDRP response document. When you read a UDRP case, if you like any part relevant to your situation, copy it to prefill your response document. After a while, you'll have a rich document tailored to your investing situation.

Click to expand...

Thank you. I was about to suggest something very much along these lines myself

What's more, this is perfectly compatible with Abdul's idea, which is great, but IMHO really wishful thinking for so many reasons it's hard to know where to start, but here goes...

In most cases, failure to respond to an UDRP complaint primarily stems not from lack of money, but from lack of knowledge about the UDRP process, relevant case studies, resulting in lack of confidence on the part of the respondent. This makes many people hesitate to throw good money after bad, so to speak, even thought they could afford to defend the case (were they more knowledgeable and had more confidence in winning a case).

The other culprit here is economics, specifically the unique economics of domain investing. When evaluating the costs and chances of successfully defending their domain, most people will compare these to their cost of acquisition and not the domain's potential end user sale value.

Enter Abdul's idea. I'm sure there would be lots of takers, crying about how unfair this world we live in is, namely their getting hit with an UDRP after trying to peddle the domain in question to a TM holder for $5,000, no less! And how much they would like to have a chance of defending their, er, wishful thinking (to be polite about it)... provided someone else foots the bill, so they can hold on to their domain and hopefully sell it for $x,xxx or who knows, maybe even $xx,xxx! Where can I sign up?

Enter Abdul's "Panel", which would need to essentially conduct a mock UDRP arbitration in the case of each and every domain entered in the "sweepstakes"! Interesting how Abdul's case study (the "Carribean" one left undefended) would fare in front of his proposed "Panel"

Enter the sponsors, i.e. domainers willing to finance this project... well, can't wait to see the long list of takers! Seriously. I have a lot of projects I'd like to run past people willing to put up money here!

Sorry for my less than enthusiastis take on an admittedly great idea, in principle. But so is socialism. So is guaranteed income. Now, what we need is to find a middle ground that would bring about a solution of practically supporting domainers hit with UDRP cases. On this, I stand 100% with Abdul, as I expect will most Name Pros

AbdulBasit.com said:

Sorry for my bad English. But what I actually meant is any respondent for whom our IP lawyer have successfully defended the case, the respondent can donate any amount in future if possible to the management who's handling all this. The funds will be used for next case and respondent coming our way which will be first approved by the panel members.

We'll have a lawyer on panel who usually charges let's suppose $1500 for responding but when he joins us, he/she will charge around $1000 and lawyer will be paid from that collected donations.

Have I made things clear now?

Click to expand...

Not a problem at all!

Makes a whole lot more sense now. Thanks for clearing things up.

If I may add, perhaps you may want to create like a "revolving seat", where different IP lawyers are tasked with a handful of specific cases based on their interest/domain expertise/work schedule. I say this because I believe as the cases pile up, it will become a challenge in and of itself to hear and/or represent all cases in a timely manner.

Hustling said:

Not a problem at all!

Makes a whole lot more sense now. Thanks for clearing things up.

If I may add, perhaps you may want to create like a "revolving seat", where different IP lawyers are tasked with a handful of specific cases based on their interest/domain expertise/work schedule. I say this because I believe as the cases pile up, it will become a challenge in and of itself to hear and/or represent all cases in a timely manner.

Click to expand...

We can start with one lawyer and other panel members be top domainers. As we grow further, can add more lawyers and do the way you suggested which will keep things in balance.