Don’t Get Caught in the Legal Cybersquatting Crossfire

[News]

Despite the fact that it is 2016 and the laws regarding cybersquatting on well known brands are well established, some people still seem a bit too cavalier when it comes to owning infringing domain names. My guess is that some people either don’t know about the protections given to brands or they believe the risk/reward analysis is in their favor.

My opinion is that some people need to be less cavalier about buying trademark domain names, especially in the new gTLDs. It is highly unlikely that a brand will not participate in the sunrise periods and then pay a premium to a domain investor for their non-generic branded domain name. It is also highly unlikely that the infringing domain name will generate the revenue necessary to tip the risk / reward analysis in favor of the domain owner. Buying trademark names in 2016, when PPC revenue is well below its highs, seems far too risky to me....

Read More

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

it's amazing how some big names in the biz are guilty of cybersquatting

take this for example re the infamous domain blogger Konstantinos Zournas of onlinedomain com / bluepixel com fame

seems he thought it was a good idea to reg loads of Microsoft TMS - lol he even contested they weren't infringements OOPS not smart, in fact a massive case of DOH

Anyone else know of any similarly ludicrous & illegal TM infringements from any other "supposed domain experts" ? If so please post

Names Zournas registered - yes he did LOL

microsoftword.org
microsoftexcel.org
microsoftclipgallery.com
windowshosting.info
windows.info
mywindows.org


Guess what? hmm he lost & rightly so
Exact details can be found if you "google"

domaindecisions/1093928

 

[Jv1999]

it's amazing how some big names in the biz are guilty of cybersquatting

take this for example re the infamous domain blogger Konstantinos Zournas of onlinedomain com / bluepixel com fame

seems he thought it was a good idea to reg loads of Microsoft TMS - lol he even contested they weren't infringements OOPS not smart, in fact a massive case of DOH

Anyone else know of any similarly ludicrous & illegal TM infringements from any other "supposed domain experts" ? If so please post

Names Zournas registered - yes he did LOL

microsoftword.org
microsoftexcel.org
microsoftclipgallery.com
windowshosting.info
windows.info
mywindows.org


Guess what? hmm he lost & rightly so
Exact details can be found if you "google"

domaindecisions/1093928

windows.info and mywindows.org aren't per se infringing. You'd have to put a website or parking page that had something to do withs oftware / Microsoft.

Anyway, the big timers are buying up TMs u know why? Cuz if u reg GOOGLEMICROSOFT.com, you can keep it. Why? Because neither could claim it without getting into a huge legal battle with the other titan. So just let the domainer keep it than start WWIII.

 

[jberryhill]

lol he even contested they weren't infringements OOPS not smart

No he did not.

http://www.adrforum.com/domaindecisions/1093928.htm

"Further, Panel is advised by Respondent in its Response that Respondent does not deny that the domains of <microsoftword.org>, <microsoftexcel.org> and <microsoftclipgallery.com> are identical to the trademarks of Microsoft, and thus consents to transfer of these names to Complainant."

Apparently, you didn't read the actual decision. He didn't argue over those names at all, and agreed to transfer them.

It sometimes happens that people buy or sell entire portfolios of domain names. When you buy out someone's entire inventory and they either bulk transfer the names, there can be all sorts of surprises in that package. I don't know what his particular circumstances were with these names, but it is not surprising that volume registrants can end up with a few odds & ends.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Actually he did if you read it correctly

and I quote "Respondent contends that the domain names <window.info> and <mywindows.org> contain the term “windows” but also claims that the term “windows” is a generic dictionary term"

Also the chances of all these TM infringing names being somehow "leftovers" is zero - I mean come on?

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

In short not only did he illegally register / buy these domains but he tried to actually contest part of Microsoft's claims - absolutely insane & completely dodgy.

 

[Ross Murray]

Its insane how one can claim that these domains are not actually trademark names but generic dictionary words.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

My thoughts exactly
This is so blatantly amateurish it is unreal

 

[todaygold]

Anyway, the big timers are buying up TMs u know why? Cuz if u reg GOOGLEMICROSOFT.com, you can keep it. Why? Because neither could claim it without getting into a huge legal battle with the other titan. So just let the domainer keep it than start WWIII.

I highly doubt that. In that case, google and microsoft would probably work together and come to an agreement that one of them file the claim, then after they get the domain, they will simply leave it as a blank page. In that case, but companies would be better off and the domainer would still lose. Don't mess with big companies, they aren't as stupid as you make them out to be.

 

[Domains - Wanted]

Its insane how one can claim that these domains are not actually trademark names but generic dictionary words.

Are you by any chance referring to the domains windows.info and mywindows.org?

 

[Jv1999]

I highly doubt that. In that case, google and microsoft would probably work together and come to an agreement that one of them file the claim, then after they get the domain, they will simply leave it as a blank page. In that case, but companies would be better off and the domainer would still lose. Don't mess with big companies, they aren't as stupid as you make them out to be.

You're right, I think... I'm not sure if Microsoft and Google would really really really have an inter-executive meeting and waste that much of their higher executives' time just to get a domain that isn't being used nor will neither use.

Plus, they'll realize it's fruitless because that only solves the problem ONCE. If they let it expire with both agreeing neither will use it.... another domainer could just reg it again.......... and again.......... and again...... you can't just stop a domain from being reg'd, right? It has to be reg'd.

So you're saying they'd spend even more resources to establish a third party trust JUST to be the registrant of the domain (we're talking like over $1k per year just for this shi*) that no one's going to use.

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

It would be a different story, though, if Mann used the domain and turned it into a site that's ranking.... HOlelleey shiz, there would be cowpies hitting turbines.

 

[todaygold]

You're right, I think... I'm not sure if Microsoft and Google would really really really have an inter-executive meeting and waste that much of their higher executives' time just to get a domain that isn't being used nor will neither use.

Plus, they'll realize it's fruitless because that only solves the problem ONCE. If they let it expire with both agreeing neither will use it.... another domainer could just reg it again.......... and again.......... and again...... you can't just stop a domain from being reg'd, right? It has to be reg'd.

So you're saying they'd spend even more resources to establish a third party trust JUST to be the registrant of the domain (we're talking like over $1k per year just for this shi*) that no one's going to use.

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

It would be a different story, though, if Mann used the domain and turned it into a site that's ranking.... HOlelleey shiz, there would be cowpies hitting turbines.

You must struggle with reading comprehension? Where on earth did I say anything about forming a trust? And the CEO's aren't going to hold a meeting just for that...it would be handled by far lower level people in each companies legal department. Google is already a registrar, they could easily keep the domain themselves, registered to themselves and they would have spoken about this with Microsoft's legal department, who won't care that it is in Google's name as long as they just keep it as a blank page. Lastly, both of these companies have many many many protective registrations, I'm sure another $8 a year isn't going to bankrupt either of them. Think a little before making dumb comments.

 

[Jv1999]

You must struggle with reading comprehension? Where on earth did I say anything about forming a trust? And the CEO's aren't going to hold a meeting just for that...it would be handled by far lower level people in each companies legal department. Google is already a registrar, they could easily keep the domain themselves, registered to themselves and they would have spoken about this with Microsoft's legal department, who won't care that it is in Google's name as long as they just keep it as a blank page. Lastly, both of these companies have many many many protective registrations, I'm sure another $8 a year isn't going to bankrupt either of them. Think a little before making dumb comments.

LOL my gawd the qq.

I don't think you understand what I said... which is okay. I'm not typing it out again. I don't need the salt .

 

[todaygold]

LOL my gawd the qq.

I don't think you understand what I said... which is okay. I'm not typing it out again. I don't need the salt .

No problem, you either lack communication skills if your post can't be understood...or you realize you are wrong.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Cybersquatting is the number one reason domain investors are looked on as sneaky, disreputable chancers imo.
Thats the main reason I posted here,time the domain investing community self regulated - if that is remotely possible that is.

 

[deez007]

My thoughts exactly
This is so blatantly amateurish it is unreal

Windows.info and myWindows.info would not be TM names... the other ones for sure..but these two domains alone would not be TM violations.

 

[Christian Taylor]

Well, I've learned something big. Before joining this site, I used to think "if I buy it, it's mine." I'd regularly look for stuff like "iPhone<number>.com" good thing I never bought one!

 

[BrandYourself]

oh dear, not good

 

[BrandYourself]

wow was sent this by an old pal of mine
here are 7 (yes seven) more cases of cybersquatting that Konstantinos Zournas of onlinedomain com / bluepixel com was guilty of - TM victims incl the likes of Prudential Insurance, Mattel INC, Avaya INC...This is incredible, really.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=site:www.adrforum.com+Konstantinos+Zournas&oq=site:www.adrforum.com+Konstantinos+Zournas&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i58.6913j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[dordomai]

wow was sent this by an old pal of mine
here are 7 (yes seven) more cases of cybersquatting that Konstantinos Zournas of onlinedomain com / bluepixel com was guilty of - TM victims incl the likes of Prudential Insurance, Mattel INC, Avaya INC...This is incredible, really.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=site:www.adrforum.com+Konstantinos+Zournas&oq=site:www.adrforum.com+Konstantinos+Zournas&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i58.6913j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

at least some of these are BS.

ashley.biz

This is generic.

The Mattel INC case was a domain registration clearly unrelated to their business.

barbitwins.com

Nothing to do with Barbie. Former Playboy models.

pru.us

A 3L .us not Prudential Insurance.

Avaya INC. Actually they lost this case and it was BS and the owner had not targeted the TM holder. Reverse Domain Name Hijacking was found.

Did you check these cases in detail? They were either generic or unrelated to the TM holder. Sounds more likely that in these cases they were the victim of overly protective TM holders and sloppy panelists.

 

[BrandYourself]

ahh ok if you wish to whitewash his serial cybersquatting fine I guess, next you will be telling me these were bona fide purchases also


microsoftword.org
microsoftexcel.org
microsoftclipgallery.com
windowshosting.info
windows.info
mywindows.org

Thing is Zournas does get it right the odd time when he decides to do a hatchet job on his blog but way more often he is vindictive as hell simply for the hell of it.
People in glass houses though really shouldn't throw quite so many stones etc.
Anyhow I'm sure there plenty more to come out of all this, in fact I'm positive of it.

 

[Rachel Mcdonalds]

Its insane how one can claim that these domains are not actually trademark names but generic dictionary words.

i agree. that is foolish.

 

[dordomai]

ahh ok if you wish to whitewash his serial cybersquatting fine I guess, next you will be telling me these were bona fide purchases also


microsoftword.org
microsoftexcel.org
microsoftclipgallery.com
windowshosting.info
windows.info
mywindows.org

Thing is Zournas does get it right the odd time when he decides to do a hatchet job on his blog but way more often he is vindictive as hell simply for the hell of it.
People in glass houses though really shouldn't throw quite so many stones etc.
Anyhow I'm sure there plenty more to come out of all this, in fact I'm positive of it.

not trying to whitewash any of these but the others in the link were generics and the UDRPs were filed by TM bullies.

 

[BrandYourself]

have a good look through all of the complainants claims in the seven cases - it is evident from them that Zournas is not only a serial cybersquatter but also a power mad blogger who thinks he can print what he wants when he wants with no recourse.
He points one side of every story only, his side - that is his style so I think it is healthy for our Industry to highlight his all too obvious "shortcomings"
Grab the popcorn there's plenty more to come.
Talking of bullies theres not many bigger bullies than Mr Zournas!

 

[BrandYourself]

came across these the other day
did Konstantinos Zournas of onlinedomain.com run scams on these domains?
if so how many more victims were there?

https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travelbuzz/1004520-air-couriers.html


has he run another scam - this one a phone based one

http://800notes.com/Phone.aspx/1-609-948-0988/2