Dynadot

UDRP BC30.com UDRP lost by NamePros Member

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

Silentptnr

Domains88.comTop Member
Impact
47,106
Last edited:
19
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
it should fall back to fair market value for the domain. Should not go with the complaintants intent to steal the domain but to get a fair value. otherwise they are just robbing Rob. excuse my pun. Domaining is a mental stress game, society has yet to value mental stress the same as physical stress. We go thru more than people know holding domains anyway thus mental strain. Values need to be rearranged as to what we are really going thru and physical value. Just as much as court points out distress has a monetary value so does domaining whether it goes to a negative court situation or not. ty.
 
4
•••
and you know, boo hiss and yea for our side. lol
 
1
•••
Sound like his case could of used a lil boost from a attorney...
 
2
•••
His name is Rob Monster by his parents, not Monster Rob, did you ever hear of the football club in South Africa owned by none other than Winnie Mandela? They were thugs and killed people with tires and kerosene burning the victims by the tires hanging from their necks. Anyway, what is happening here is injustice by the system that should be justice. that is all. The true final decision should be $4200 to Rob and domain transferred instead of working the system to steal the domain. Wow, im upset. hmmmm
 
3
•••
If you can appeal, appeal. And get an attorney.
 
1
•••
Communism at its finest, you can have things but the government owns it all anyway.
 
5
•••
Sorry to hear that, Rob.

although i value any name with Ns’ at ZERO

I know they still carry value. i support you
 
Last edited:
4
•••
Last edited:
2
•••
Yeah, there have been a couple of times I put a deadline on a price. I told the buyer that the price quote was good for a specific period, after which, I would not be bound to that price. Maybe that's what happened here.

I would have probably consulted, if not engaged, legal counsel. Maybe the domain wasn't valuable enough to Rob to get legal counsel?

Either way, I'm surprised that the complainant won. Their trademark was not even close to the domain at issue. I think it was a bad udrp decision.

I'd love to know more. Can you discuss this @Rob Monster ?
 
5
•••
It was a hand-reg for which I had a fairly modest basis.

The buyer had used DomainAgents to try to buy it in September. I gave them a very fair offer:

upload_2020-2-20_11-22-25.png


They then filed a UDRP. My upside was probably a bit capped so hiring John Berryhill was not really a slam dunk for ROI even though I would probably hire him if he liked his odds.

It was also a bit of an experiment to see if the one-person panel is capable of getting it right.

I submit they did not.

Here was my input to this case sent on January 10, 2020 to WIPO:

#####

In brief, BC30.com was bought be me. It is LLNN.com popular with Chinese speculators lately. We have owned it for a long time. It could easily refer to the year 30 B.C. as well as countless other BC 3.0, etc.

You can be fully certain that the domain was registered in 2011 by me, on the drop, for no other reason than because it is short, like Epik.com. There is absolutely no case of malfeasance. None.

However, if we lose this complaint, we will take care to critique the outcome in the public theater. We are not huge believers in the future of WIPO. See here:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/have-you-hugged-your-whois-privacy-provider-today.1162503

https://www.namepros.com/threads/wh...upper-that-is-held-via-privacy-proxy.1163437/

These articles get thousands of views because I wrote them. Most of my threads rank in the top most active in any given month.

Here is one written by someone else:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/qa...tqatar-com-in-cybersquatting-dispute.1163473/

It should have had a lot more activity due to the egregiousness of the decision. I have yet to draw attention to it.

Long story short: dissatisfaction with WIPO increases with each passing day, in part because the system is routinely abused by overreaching complainants.

In fact, WIPO UDRP made my prediction list for 2020:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/happy-new-years-what-is-your-2020-forecast.1170533/

See the second to last prediction:

upload_2020-2-20_11-27-1.png


I suggest make the right decision. The domain is generic and the complaint should be denied. And if you would find RDNH, I will acknowledge a glimmer of hope when it comes to due process from WIPO.

I also suggest you advise complainants to just pay a fair price for domains they have no right to in the first place. It saves time and it will avoid the early demise of your institution as you seek to redeem yourselves in 2020.

Good luck.

Regards,
Rob

#####

Well, folks, it's time for some sunlight. It's time to put on your shades because WIPO thuggery is on parade.

upload_2020-2-20_11-28-53.png


Time to pick apart their findings and see what can be learned from it.

Looking ahead, the DNProtect.com project being developed with @bhartzer will help folks insure against such nonsense cases. There is protection in numbers -- spread the risk across many domains.
 
Last edited:
27
•••
Anyway, now that you have seen the verbatim of my response to WIPO, you can't say I did not warn them. I much rather compete in the court of public opinion than deal with anonymous panelists whose very existence is subsidized by the corporate clients who pay the UDRP fees. It's rigged folks. Not a fan of WIPO and look forward to empowering a private sector counter-measure for dispute resolution so that nobody in their right mind would choose to use WIPO if they could avoid it.
 
15
•••
7
•••
I am a nub, but for me "This is Sparta"
Nobody should be able to take away your domain for free, just because you are skilled in sales negotiation.
 
10
•••
I wonder if there was any cash passed under the table?

In my responses I ALWAYS give a price and a time line. 48, 72 hours and sometimes ten days if it is a big sale. It is standard sales procedure to give a deadline for a deal. Also in my response to the low baller (assuming the first offer was low) I let them know the price has no where to go but up after my time period for purchase has passed.

The complainant clearly wanted to abbreviate their name...the clowns should have paid Rob his asking price in the first place. WIPO be clowns, yo.
 
8
•••
I wonder if there was any cash passed under the table?

In my responses I ALWAYS give a price and a time line. 48, 72 hours and sometimes ten days if it is a big sale. It is standard sales procedure to give a deadline for a deal. Also in my response to the low baller (assuming the first offer was low) I let them know the price has no where to go but up after my time period for purchase has passed.

The complainant clearly wanted to abbreviate their name...the clowns should have paid Rob his asking price in the first place. WIPO be clowns, yo.

Exactly.

The crazy part is that the $4800 would have been about what they probably ended up funding in legal fee and WIPO filing fees to get the domain. It just took longer and gave me a new ax to grind.

The case was far from a slam dunk for the complainant and now WIPO has to endure the court of public opinion for getting another case wrong.

Anyway, WIPO will end soon. With each abuse of due process, the Internet further decentralizes.
 
11
•••
Exactly.

The crazy part is that the $4800 would have been about what they probably ended up funding in legal fee and WIPO filing fees to get the domain. It just took longer and gave me a new ax to grind.

The case was far from a slam dunk for the complainant and now WIPO has to endure the court of public opinion for getting another case wrong.

Anyway, WIPO will end soon. With each abuse of due process, the Internet further decentralizes.

Of all the changes/improvement/additions happening at Epik, I am becoming more and more convinced the DNProtect project will have an immediate and long lasting influence on the domain industry. I've been unable to work out in my mind an ideal way for it to operate, but I wish you and the programmers lots of success in making it a viable service!
 
5
•••
Exactly.

The crazy part is that the $4800 would have been about what they probably ended up funding in legal fee and WIPO filing fees to get the domain. It just took longer and gave me a new ax to grind.

The case was far from a slam dunk for the complainant and now WIPO has to endure the court of public opinion for getting another case wrong.

Anyway, WIPO will end soon. With each abuse of due process, the Internet further decentralizes.
Why not go to court over this to prove a point and establish ground rules? Yes it will cost more than the domain is worth but if this was bc.com or 30.com you would fight for justice.

The community relies on the few that have resources to fight back. Just a thought.
 
9
•••
My thoughts on this -

1.) When a buyer counters an asking price, that asking price is no longer valid.

2.) It should not be the UDRP judge's decision to determine what is "fair market value". A registrant either has the right to sell a domain of not. If they have the right to sell it, the asking price is their prerogative.

Brad
 
25
•••
Why not go to court over this to prove a point and establish ground rules? Yes it will cost more than the domain is worth but if this was bc.com or 30.com you would fight for justice.

The community relies on the few that have resources to fight back. Just a thought.

If I had spent 8 hours managing a formal defense of BC30.com from an apparently budget-constrained complainant, that would have been 8 hours not spent doing something else in January.

At the same, I recognize the larger problem which is a corrupt institution that also handed VisitQatar.com to a complainant.

Believe it or not, I try to pick my battles and then sequence them.

When David walked onto the battlefield to meet Goliath, he had only a sling, but his faith was mighty. Do you know what else David took with him? He brought 5 stones to the battlefield.

After all, Goliath had 4 brothers -- most people miss that.

david-goliath.jpg


Read Psalms -- Solomon and David did not have it easy either. Eventually they prevailed.

My takeaway is this: pick your battles, sequence battles, have faith, and stay humble.

We'll see how it all plays out.
 
14
•••
It was a hand-reg for which I had a fairly modest basis.

The buyer had used DomainAgents to try to buy it in September. I gave them a very fair offer:

Show attachment 145323

They then filed a UDRP. My upside was probably a bit capped so hiring John Berryhill was not really a slam dunk for ROI even though I would probably hire him if he liked his odds.

It was also a bit of an experiment to see if the one-person panel is capable of getting it right.

I submit they did not.

Here was my input to this case sent on January 10, 2020 to WIPO:

#####

In brief, BC30.com was bought be me. It is LLNN.com popular with Chinese speculators lately. We have owned it for a long time. It could easily refer to the year 30 B.C. as well as countless other BC 3.0, etc.

You can be fully certain that the domain was registered in 2011 by me, on the drop, for no other reason than because it is short, like Epik.com. There is absolutely no case of malfeasance. None.

However, if we lose this complaint, we will take care to critique the outcome in the public theater. We are not huge believers in the future of WIPO. See here:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/have-you-hugged-your-whois-privacy-provider-today.1162503

https://www.namepros.com/threads/wh...upper-that-is-held-via-privacy-proxy.1163437/

These articles get thousands of views because I wrote them. Most of my threads rank in the top most active in any given month.

Here is one written by someone else:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/qa...tqatar-com-in-cybersquatting-dispute.1163473/

It should have had a lot more activity due to the egregiousness of the decision. I have yet to draw attention to it.

Long story short: dissatisfaction with WIPO increases with each passing day, in part because the system is routinely abused by overreaching complainants.

In fact, WIPO UDRP made my prediction list for 2020:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/happy-new-years-what-is-your-2020-forecast.1170533/

See the second to last prediction:

Show attachment 145324

I suggest make the right decision. The domain is generic and the complaint should be denied. And if you would find RDNH, I will acknowledge a glimmer of hope when it comes to due process from WIPO.

I also suggest you advise complainants to just pay a fair price for domains they have no right to in the first place. It saves time and it will avoid the early demise of your institution as you seek to redeem yourselves in 2020.

Good luck.

Regards,
Rob

#####

Well, folks, it's time for some sunlight. It's time to put on your shades because WIPO thuggery is on parade.

Show attachment 145325

Time to pick apart their findings and see what can be learned from it.

Looking ahead, he DNProtect.com project being developed with @bhartzer will help folks insure against such nonsense cases. There is protection in numbers -- spread the risk across many domains.
lol....I love the punch behind the pillow in your response.
 
5
•••
My thoughts on this -

1.) When a buyer counters an asking price, that asking price is no longer valid.

2.) It should not be the UDRP judge's decision to determine what is "fair market value". A registrant either has the right to sell a domain of not. If they have the right to sell it, the asking price is their prerogative.

Brad
Exactly
 
4
•••
There should be an appeal process available where a larger panel might review decisions.
 
11
•••
lol....I love the punch behind the pillow in your response.

Thanks -- they were absolutely warned. The topic of WIPO overreach desperately needs to be exposed and they gave my a license to do exactly that. I literally told them:

- Here's a trap
- I recommend you not step in it
- If you step in it, we'll share it with the world.

The outcome was predictable. It will cost WIPO a lot more than the domain cost me.
 
9
•••
Thanks -- they were absolutely warned. The topic of WIPO overreach desperately needs to be exposed and they gave my a license to do exactly that. I literally told them:

- Here's a trap
- I recommend you not step in it
- If you step in it, we'll share it with the world.

The outcome was predictable. It will cost WIPO a lot more than the domain cost me.
So you plan to fight the decision or not?
 
3
•••
Back