I couldn't disagree with you more. Generic is generic. Filing a UDRP over a generic is a useless proposition, from the standpoint of common sense. This is why the whole UDRP process needs to be revamped. The problem comes when trying to apply old-system rules to the internet world. Just doesn't work. The dinosaur mentality needs to be laid to rest. It drags everything backward.
You do realize that TMs can be established through usage? If you would have used the .co and built a similar site to the .com it would have been a problem for you! To say something is generic is pointless.
---------- Post added at 02:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:18 AM ----------
I disagree. "Defensive Registration" is such a cliche term. If someone is creative, you can pick any solid name to realize your idea. Sometimes alternate extensions have appeal because they stand-out. There's nothing wrong with that. It may be wrong for some who live by the sword of protectionism. "Protecting" is fine, but when one makes an ideology out of it, it stagnates the whole market and becomes dull. I like the idea f new TLDs. Gives a feeling of freshness and possibility.
You should hope that more people don't learn what an "extension" is. If they did or do, you might rethink your stance.
That's understandable.
I think defensive registrations are really the only practical use of this TLD outside ccTLD purposes. This is a strategy employed by many companies to protect their "namespace" and grab a few typos. IMO.
---------- Post added at 02:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:24 AM ----------
The end-users are at their desks doing their work, uninterested in domain auctions. You have to find them. I don't know many CFOs who are interested in attending a domain auction, unless they are techies or domain investors. The benefits of domains as business advertisement has to be clearly outlined to the average company.
Guys like Rick Schwartz don't do leg-work because they are very well advertised themselves. But this is not the case for most others.
My logic isn't flawed. Unfortunately, you make a sweeping generalization that just doesn't make sense. An auction with all premium names will attract a lot of people and prices will be higher. With less selection and higher quality names, people will try and get the domain that is available, as an investment, and spend the money. A lot of people have money burniing a hole in their pockets and how they spend it has a very complex psychology behind it. There is much to auction psychology, and it can't be just cornered by a glib statement or two.
Do you remember why they changed the auction format at TRAFFIC? It was because the previous auctions were so diluted. The same problem still exists at the bigger Moniker auctions. Quite a waste of time, IMO. With more attention to good quality names and a limited number, auctions would see much more success and they wouldn't waste buyers or seller's time.
A lot of this has to do with "marketing" as well. Auctions should be helping build the market and to qualify it.
I think your logic is flawed.
To begin with, some names are better than others and will get more interest. Some names are not great and hardly belong to a 'premium' auction. Predictably they will be ignored.
Buyers are not looking to buy a maximum of domains until their budgets are exhausted. They are focusing on the domains that they like most and where they feel they can get value for money.
That's why a number of domains did not get one single bid. All auctions feature a number of unsold names. That is perfectly normal.
I think you are trying too hard to rationalize the poor results. I understand that you don't like them and prefer to selectively discard them.
Now, if you remember the previous .co auction of February, it fetched twice as much money. Arguably the names were much better.
Buyers pay what they think the names are worth imo.
That begs the question: where are the end users then ?
You say that a reseller auction doesn't matter, the daily sales do. Do the daily sales among resellers count as well ?
---------- Post added at 03:00 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:44 AM ----------
Believe it or not, the internet is not run by business. Many would have us believe that. People can "create" a business trademark but they shouldn't be able to "own" a common word or phrase. It's ridiculous. "Facebook" is clearly a trademark. "Faces" is not.
A fictitious example. The most insane thing is that the UDRP process is making it possible for Apple Inc. to take over an apple (fruit) educational site at Apple.org. This is so absurd, there aren't any words for it....
None of the examples you've given can be considered "common" words. "Airlines" is common. "British Airways" is not common. "Computers" is common, "Computer Associates" is not. The line is thin but clearly visible. If a person would use the word in a normal non-business related conversation, in normal daily conversation, you can bet it's a generic.
Is International Business Machines really a brand? What about Computer Associates? Bavarian Motor Works? British Airways? British Telecom? Generic is meaningless argument most of the time. Domainers skirt the line of ethics with every sale they make imho.
On their website:
"Manual Link Building are a UK based SEO and Link Building company"
Obviously they believe they have a TM (though unregistered). In this case it probably is too generic (and in the same area as their business). That said, as far as something like UDRP goes you can defend your position without a trademark so it should work both ways depending on the strength and how well known you are by that name ( but interestingly it doesn't - see Knicks.com)
True.
Value the domain less than the cost of the lawsuit = Profit. The domainer registered the .co, the .com bought the .co without a lawsuit. It's the quickest way I've seen to make money in .co.
It's not Cybersquatting in the technical sense (hell the ACPA doesn't even apply in the UK) but underneath it's the same thing. Buy the .co and sell to the .com. On a daily basis people checking the .CO droplist are looking to see what the .com has on it.... domainer deny but the truth is obvious.
I'm not judging. Just stating. Not really looking for debate.
