AmbienRx.net (taken from me) - Lessons Learned

[yellowfishdesigns]

I just wanted to share a brief story about buying trademarked domains.

Don't do it!

The makers of Ambien (sleep meds) are based in France. They sent lawyers after me to give up the name.

I told them no, pay me.

They warned me again.

I said "NO, pay me".

Next thing I know I get served papers by the International Trademark Office (or something like that?)...

They took a statement from me, the case went to arbitration..the domain was awarded to that company...I had to give it up...and BOOM...that's it.

No legal fees on my part, but the whole process was freakin scary to be honest.

I never made any money with the site anyway...I won't ever buy a trademarked domain...you won't have a leg to stand on!

 

[evertonian7uk]

Part of your problem was PAY ME......NO PAY ME!

thats the biggest mistake...with some TM domains, there are ways to keep it, but not when you state NO PAY ME!

so your now labelled a squatter by wipo?

 

[duceman]

At least you dodged the UDRP fines. :D

 

[labrocca]

But now even if you own a domain legitimately you are scarred by having a WIPO decision against you for cybersquatting.

 

[flamewalker]

Don't tell a TM owner to pay you for an infringing name... thats like saying "Heres the pistol loaded and cocked... just pull the trigger please!".

 

[Dave_Z]

That's a thing with "demanding" the trademark holder to pay you for it. Even if
you believe you should be reimbursed for any expenses with it, they have zero
obligations to you and, for the most part, are in a position to hold you liable
for it.

Hmm, it could've been worse...

 

[Kate]

so your now labelled a squatter by wipo?

Hmm yes

But now even if you own a domain legitimately you are scarred by having a WIPO decision against you for cybersquatting.

Well some domain holders have been thru UDRP quite a few times, sometimes they win, sometimes they lose but if the panelist is biased your previous track record won't help.
Actually the worst in all this is that your reputation is tarnished. The rulings are public and appear in google. This can hurt you in the long run. IMO situations like that need to be avoided at all costs.

 

[DeenaEsq]

I agree. It's best not to register trademarked domain names to begin with, but if you feel that you must, then offering to sell to the trademark holder is a HUGE no no...

Frankly, "cybersquatter" is not a title you want to have associated with you...

Deena
________________________________________________________

Any opinions are offered without knowledge of the specific law of your jurisdiction and with only the limited information provided in your post. No advice given here should be reasonably relied upon by you or any third party without consulting an attorney who is aware of all of the facts and law surrounding your situation. Any advice given here is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship in any way.

 

[IAmAllanShore]

Hmm, it could've been worse...

It couldn't have gone much better for him/her, in all honesty
The OP is out a domain name, and now has a "record" that will follow him/her for future domain disputes ( http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2007/d2007-1767.html ), but they could have been much more aggressive than they were, so the OP should count himself/herself lucky, :imho:

Especially with this... (Taken from the wipo decision above.)

B. Respondent

Whilst there was no formal response to the Complaint filed by the Respondent (in the form required by paragraph 5(b) of the Rules), there were certain email communications sent by the Respondent’s Administrative Contact, Mr. Gary Tharaldson (who also described himself as “Director, SOMDJobs.com”).

First, on December 6, 2007, in an email to both the Center and the Complainant’s representative, Mr. Tharaldson acknowledged receipt of the Complaint and said the following:

“To all concerned, I’ve said it a thousand times now … give me the new owners contact info so I can enter it into GoDaddy and I will transfer the account.

I don’t want any trouble!”

Secondly, in reply to the Center’s acknowledgement of the December 6 email, Mr. Tharaldson emailed both the Center and the Complainant’s representative on December 10, 2007 in the following terms, apparently reflecting some change of heart:

“I’m not giving up Ambirx.net unless I’m ordered to do so. I got your complaint and it’s crap.

I CAN own this site! If you want it so bad, you’ll have to make me an offer.

In the mean time, my site will remain a site that reports the “side-effects” of Ambien.

Good day, and I anxiously await the WIPO decision.”

No more anxious waiting, I guess

-Allan :gl:

 

[flamewalker]

The obvious bad faith of the Respondent results from the following elements:

- the Respondent has no prior right and no authorization given by the Complainant concerning the AMBIEN trademark;

- the Respondent’s awareness that Ambien is an anti-insomnia drug;

- the Respondent uses the domain name to attract Internet users for commercial gain.

And then it goes on to explain that the site was used to sell Ambien and competitor products...

Word to the wise... do not attempt to make money from a TM... only the TM owner has rights to make money with it!