Help! Former Domain Name Owner Threatening Legal Action. Need Advice.

[steely]

Hi domain friends. I picked up a law domain name (Last Name + Law .com) in a GoDaddy Closeout in April 2016. It's been parked with Voodoo since then with a For Sale sign. I just got a disturbing e-mail from apparently the former owner. Here are some excepts in italics:


You have unlawfully retained and are now holding for ransom my domain name, ********law.com, which has injured my business and is in violation of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act of 1999 (ACPA), which carries substantial penalties, including but not limited to monetary damages and attorney fees.

If you do not agree to return my domain name to me within 48 hours of today, I will have no option other than to commence legal action against you, and potentially others associated with you, without further notice.


I have to admit, I'm worried. Is this person bluffing, or could they really take legal action against me? If the worst they can do is file a UDRP, I'm less worried. Can they do anything more? Could I be arrested? I know that may sound like a ridiculous question, but......what's the answer?

Also, if this individual was to file a UDRP, what happens if I lose? How is the domain transferred away? Is it simply removed from my account, or do I need to then perform a transfer?

Thanks in advance for any advice.

 

[jideofor]

I will pay $50 for the domain name @steely.

 

[djum]

DUDE, DO NOT GIVE THAT DOMAIN NAME TO ANY OWNER... STAND YOUR GROUND! if you wish to give it to him for free, I am willing to buy it from you as stated above. I will really love to fight this owner and let's see how it ends.

Transfer domain out to China or Russia and ignore the letter.
Never give up to corporate raiders.
If they want to sue, good luck getting domain back from communist's hands for any price.

 

[Kate]

@Kate the type of "scared" advice you are giving to another domain investor, may mean you are not a good domain investor yourself? In this business, you have to be willing to defend your investments, otherwise, the person is in the wrong profession. People would always attempt to sue you for just about anything, even if they have no strong defense! This is why there are records of many failed UDRPs where complainants loss!

Apparently you don't know me very well But I am willing to develop my POV further.
First of all, I pick names carefully so as to avoid being in a difficult position. That's why we never received that sort of threats in 15 years in spite of buying and selling hundreds of domains.

This name simply isn't generic. This is the first problem.
Second problem, stemming from the above, the pool of potential end users is extremely small because the name is so specific. The OP himself said: "noticed 3-4 other end users who had the same last name and were in the law field.".
What are the odds of a sale ?

In my view, a good domain investor is someone who buys good domains. Domains that are not infringing, domain names that do not pose obvious TM issues, domain names that could appeal to a broad range of potential end users. The domain at issue has failed the test.

I agree that assets must be defended, but you don't fight over liabilities.
This name is a liability, not an asset.

Now assuming there had not been any complaint, the name almost certainly would never have sold. Then the OP would have dropped the domain anyway. Conclusion: the domain has no value. Why fight ?

Also, I had to react against the completely irresponsible advice that some members are handing out in this thread... legal threats must not be ignored, especially when they come from a lawyer.
If you want to fight a lawyer (because you think you are in the right), then you need a lawyer on your side just to level the playing field. Don't try to do that on your own ! This is suicide.

 

[djum]

Conclusion: the domain has no value.

Not true, right at the tops of the page 3 is cash offer hanging.

P.S. What this lawyer doing called fraud. TS is legitimate owner of domain, and he's straight up lying in the letter. You may be right, that it will be hard to sell this one, due to limited amount of end-users. But is someone trying to scam you, you can't just leave it like this. That lawyer-guy needs a good lesson.

What I would do is sell domain to my friend in China and good luck to Mr. bully chasing the wind.
What they do later there, broadcast porn, sell viagra, gambling casino, who knows, but our fraudster-lawyer will learn a thing or two about how to handle business right from the beginning.

 

[Kate]

There is actually a name for that: cyberflight. When you are in a hole you should stop digging.

I don't understand that entitlement mentality from domainers. Just because you can register a name doesn't mean you can do anything you want with it.
The fact is, that name would not withstand a UDRP. I am pretty sure of that.
If it goes to court, what would the judge do, side with a lawyer or side with a domain 'squatter' who has no legitimate purpose for the domain ?

Would you be happy if I registered your name + field of occupation, and then parked it with porn links because you refuse to buy it ?
Why is it so hard to understand that he may be concerned with his reputation and worried about what is going on with the domain. Put yourself in the shoes of an user.

 

[frank-germany]

who has no legitimate purpose for the domain ?

what is a legitimate purpose of a domain ?

domains can be used:
1) for ( ftp ) file storage only
2) for email only
3) for tracking only

all those are legitimate use of a domain

trademark is a complex law

in domaining the main rule is
frist comes first served

and that is good so

 

[djum]

There is actually a name for that: cyberflight. When you are in a hole you should stop digging.

I don't understand that entitlement mentality from domainers. Just because you can register a name doesn't mean you can do anything you want with it.
The fact is, that name would not withstand a UDRP. I am pretty sure of that.
If it goes to court, what would the judge do, side with a lawyer or side with a domain 'squatter' who has no legitimate purpose for the domain ?

Would you be happy if I registered your name + field of occupation, and then parked it with porn links because you refuse to buy it ?
Why is it so hard to understand that he may be concerned with his reputation and worried about what is going on with the domain. Put yourself in the shoes of an user.

First of all, I don't think this case is sure win for the lawyer in UDRP.
TS doesn't do anything to profit from domain.
And he didn't acquire it with intentions to hurt lawyers business. Also there's other companies that can claim the same rights for this domain - other lawyers with the same name.
One of alternative strategies would be to offer domain to them if you treated like shit by this mighty guy. Then he will never get it. Never.
Anyway, UDRP outcome is mystery, not a sure win for the lawyer, and will cost him $1500.
If he wants to go this way, oh well, good luck betting your money on uncertain outcome.

What I wanted to talk about is unprofessional letter. If he treats TS like, he doesn't deserve domain. I would be happy to give it to someone else, but not him.
Always treat people nice, he forgot this rule, or didn't follow it ever.

They didn't even talk about buying domain or refusing to buy. Lawyer started attacking poor guy from beginning, accusing him of getting domain illegally.
If he valued domain that much he would never let it expire, or would at least realize that it was his own fault, not TS fault. People buy domains for many reasons, why would he blame TS of doing something wrong right away?
Professional deformation? Spent too much time working with criminals?

 

[Kate]

TS doesn't do anything to profit from domain.

He bought the domain to sell it. Not because he is a lawyer and he was going to use itt.

People buy domains for many reasons, why would he blame TS of doing something wrong right away?

We have to keep in mind that the complainant is a lawyer, not a domainer. He is not familiar with our trade (few people are aware of what we do). He probably did not realize the OP bought the name to resell to other law firms who have similar names. So he sees that somebody who is not a lawyer, has registered a name that he used to own. Anyway, I can understand his concern, I would be concerned too because of the potential for abuse. You could for example use the domain to impersonate the lawyer. It's normal that people are on the defensive.
Anyway, the majority of people don't like our trade and they think we are squatters. Simply put, the OP is not a lawyer and his personal name has nothing to do with the domain. An ordinary person doesn't think he has legitimate interests because he couldn't use the domain.

I am playing the devil's advocate a little bit, but we have to look at the situation from different points of view. I would not register this type of domain because I don't think it could sustain a UDRP so in my view it's not investment-worthy. I would go for more generic domains.

 

[carob]

What we don't know here is how the domain was used before - did the lawyer just register it to use at some future time? Was it used for email? Does it correspond to the name of the business, in which case there is a de facto trademark on it?

Seems generally a simple last name is not taken to be an automatically trademarked phrase in the way that firstname+lastname is. But that is in UDRP terms - a lawyer can take this to court rather than UDRP.

If the previous owner didn't miss the domain for 4 months and doesn't want to just get it right back by paying a sub $1k listed fixed price for it, you have to wonder how important it it to them. But pride and principal might come into it, meaning they refuse to pay anything. Actually in these circumstances usually they agree to pay the price you paid for it, in this case registration fee. But if as some suggest the domain is quickly sold on to someone outside the USA, the new owner could ask to receive what they paid for it, which might be a lot.

 

[djum]

He bought the domain to sell it. Not because he is a lawyer and he was going to use itt.

We have to keep in mind that the complainant is a lawyer, not a domainer. He is not familiar with our trade (few people are aware of what we do). He probably did not realize the OP bought the name to resell to other law firms who have similar names. So he sees that somebody who is not a lawyer, has registered a name that he used to own. Anyway, I can understand his concern, I would be concerned too because of the potential for abuse. You could for example use the domain to impersonate the lawyer. It's normal that people are on the defensive.
Anyway, the majority of people don't like our trade and they think we are squatters. Simply put, the OP is not a lawyer and his personal name has nothing to do with the domain. An ordinary person doesn't think he has legitimate interests because he couldn't use the domain.

He's not profiting from domain right now. So far he just made an investment (spent money). Investment must be paid back, he did nothing wrong. And suffered verbal accusations from some idiot.

Potential for abuse doesn't equal abuse, it's the same like to blame every man that they committed rape, because they are equipped to do it.

It's funny when legal man talking about someone acquired his former domain illegally, when he bought it at the world's largest market.

I understand that this guy knows little about domains, but if he will be given domain back it's won't do any good for nobody. He needs a lesson. And best lessons learned the hard way.

 

[jamesosix]

There is actually a name for that: cyberflight. When you are in a hole you should stop digging.

I don't understand that entitlement mentality from domainers. Just because you can register a name doesn't mean you can do anything you want with it.
The fact is, that name would not withstand a UDRP. I am pretty sure of that.
If it goes to court, what would the judge do, side with a lawyer or side with a domain 'squatter' who has no legitimate purpose for the domain ?

Would you be happy if I registered your name + field of occupation, and then parked it with porn links because you refuse to buy it ?
Why is it so hard to understand that he may be concerned with his reputation and worried about what is going on with the domain. Put yourself in the shoes of an user.

Well...one could argue if they were that concerned about their business rep, they would have not let the domain drop.

 

[Kate]

Maybe, but it's the kind of defense brought up by some respondents in UDRP cases: the complainant should have bought the domain if they were so concerned (as if it was reasonable to expect that they buy all possible variations of their brands in hundreds of extensions).
It will not get you any sympathy in UDRP (or in court). Just because the complainant dropped the ball, it still doesn't mean you have a legitimate interest.

At the end of they day I see four possible outcomes, none of which are positive:

• Keep the domain: no gain, possible aggravation
  
• Sell the domain: not happening
  
• Give the domain: no gain, but at least you are relieved of a legal issue
• Drop the domain: no gain

Lesson learned: be more selective in your choice of domains so that people can't easily make a case against you.

 

[frank-germany]

Anyway, I can understand his concern, I would be concerned too because of the potential for abuse. You could for example use the domain to impersonate the lawyer. It's normal that people are on the defensive.

thats why he should have taken care about his domain
and not letting it drop in the first place

and that is not the business of the new owner at all

 

[frank-germany]

• Give the domain: no gain, but at least you are relieved of a legal issue

that is only the case if you have a contract before giving away the domain
the claimed breach of the law
is either existing or not
but to give him the domain doesn't necessarily free you from beeing sued

 

[ksusha64]

Transfer domain out to China or Russia and ignore the letter.
Never give up to corporate raiders.
If they want to sue, good luck getting domain back from communist's hands for any price.

Great advice, transfer it to ename and the guy will be screwed for sure.

 

[MR Harrist]

I think he just bluff! but it works all the times lol!
anyway, he can't sue you! unless he already patent the name! and most of the time, company can't do anything if its just parking and leave it blank!(no Bin or Prices) but if you develop the domain using popular or company name! then you'll get a deep shit! and remember if they want to sue you , it will cost them money, unless he have uncles and works as a judge! (joke)

maybe this page can give some insight about cybersquatting

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/property00/domain/CaseLaw.html

 

[pchip]

I would personally listen to what Kate has said as it is the most logical and sound advice given thus far IMO.

So many domains out there to invest in. Get the guy to reimburse you for how much you paid for the domain, transfer the domain to him and move on.

 

[Potential.Domains]

Apparently you don't know me very well But I am willing to develop my POV further.
First of all, I pick names carefully so as to avoid being in a difficult position. That's why we never received that sort of threats in 15 years in spite of buying and selling hundreds of domains.

This name simply isn't generic. This is the first problem.
Second problem, stemming from the above, the pool of potential end users is extremely small because the name is so specific. The OP himself said: "noticed 3-4 other end users who had the same last name and were in the law field.".
What are the odds of a sale ?

In my view, a good domain investor is someone who buys good domains. Domains that are not infringing, domain names that do not pose obvious TM issues, domain names that could appeal to a broad range of potential end users. The domain at issue has failed the test.

I agree that assets must be defended, but you don't fight over liabilities.
This name is a liability, not an asset.

Now assuming there had not been any complaint, the name almost certainly would never have sold. Then the OP would have dropped the domain anyway. Conclusion: the domain has no value. Why fight ?

Also, I had to react against the completely irresponsible advice that some members are handing out in this thread... legal threats must not be ignored, especially when they come from a lawyer.
If you want to fight a lawyer (because you think you are in the right), then you need a lawyer on your side just to level the playing field. Don't try to do that on your own ! This is suicide.

People with different mentality and opinions, I guess. @canbrit mentioned earlier in this thread how HugeDomains (HD) have been defending their domain assets. HD buys and sells expired domain names too, even names that contain people's first and lastnames. But what do I know, I'm sure you have been in business longer than HugeDomains and have sold more names than them!

Do you think the crooked lawyer and former owner of the domain name, would have sent same threat email to GoDaddy who sold the domain to OP via their marketplace?

Also, you speak as if you know so much about OP's domain name even more than him. What is that about? Even to the extreme extent of you concluding "the domain has no value"!

Do you actually know the Last Name + Law .com domain name that OP owns? I don't think so.

"I agree that assets must be defended, but you don't fight over liabilities.
This name is a liability, not an asset."

Isn't every domain asset a liability? It appears you are suggesting, the owner of lets say cars.com has no liability associated with their ownership of the domain? Every domain asset has at least a financial obligation, especially in terms of yearly renewals. If you don't renew it (like the former owner-looser a.k.a fraudulent lawyer), you will lose ownership rights to it. So, this argument over liability vs asset is pointless.

Even you can lose your home to the government if you don't pay your property taxes, and this homes are then auctioned off by the government thru a tax lien sale, to others willing to take over the liability associated with owning the property, etc.

I actually spoke with my lawyer friend about OP's issue with the domain name and he laughed at the threat email the former owner sent to the new owner, calling it a bluff and a first attempt in trying to regain ownership to a lost domain name—for free. If that fraudulent strategy does not work for him, don't be surprised if the same crooked lawyer later offers to buy the domain name—if his business or livelihood truly depends on it.

Lawyers are very good at sending out threatening emails/mails, and would cite every possible Acts and legal codes, with the intention to instill fear on another party into giving up. The problem is, some bad lawyers are using this tactic to exploit and take advantage of others in cases where they have absolutely no (strong) defense.

 

[Kate]

People with different mentality and opinions, I guess. @canbrit mentioned earlier in this thread how HugeDomains (HD) have been defending their domain assets. HD buys and sells expired domain names too, even names that contain people's first and lastnames. But what do I know, I'm sure you have been in business longer than HugeDomains and have sold more names than them!

You don't know what's going on behind the scenes. Precisely because they catch so many domains, often in bulk they must be getting their fair share of legal complaints.
Since you mention HugeDomains, I found 5 UDRP cases with HugeDomains as the respondent. They lost 4.
So I'm not sure they are doing such a good job of defending their assets. Some cases are just too hard to defend. At least the OP will not have a UDRP or court ruling against him. Remember that previous 'convictions' can be used against you in future proceedings to demonstrate bad faith, even when less controversial domains are contested.
PS: in 15 years, never had one single UDRP. At least we are doing something better than HD and the other 'top' domainers...

Do you think the crooked lawyer and former owner of the domain name, would have sent same threat email to GoDaddy who sold the domain to OP via their marketplace?

Why not ? You don't think GoDaddy, the biggest registrar on Earth, gets complaints of the sort on a daily basis ? They surely have lawyers on a retainer, or in-house legal department just to deal with the volume of complaints.
It's just that big corporations don't air the dirty laundry.

Also, you speak as if you know so much about OP's domain name even more than him. What is that about? Even to the extreme extent of you concluding "the domain has no value"!

Do you actually know the Last Name + Law .com domain name that OP owns? I don't think so.

He gave enough hints to conclude the name was not worth fighting for. The limited pool of end users is certainly a big factor, and if there are legal claims against the domain then the resale potential is nullified. I don't think the actual name matters really.
While some of you are saying the OP caved in, I think he did the right think in the present case.
We are not talking about a premium asset here.

I actually spoke with my lawyer friend about OP's issue with the domain name and he laughed at the threat email the former owner sent to the new owner, calling it a bluff and a first attempt in trying to regain ownership to a lost domain name—for free. If that fraudulent strategy does not work for him, don't be surprised if the same crooked lawyer later offers to buy the domain name—if his business or livelihood truly depends on it.

That lawyer friend of yours, do you think he would win the UDRP ? Because he doesn't know all the facts either. Maybe he's just happy to take the money and he will plead anything, and get paid regardless of the outcome.

Again, if the OP wants to fight a lawyer why not but the stakes have to justify it. But he needs proper advice and representation. It seems that the name was not even worth a legal consultation.

It's not the end of the world, just admit it wasn't a great domain to begin with, and move on.

 

[carob]

You don't think GoDaddy, the biggest registrar on Earth, gets complaints of the sort on a daily basis ? They surely have lawyers on a retainer, or in-house legal department just to deal with the volume of complaints.

Godaddy ToS, and many other registrars, say they can cancel a domain registration if it offends anyone at all. So they don't need to take the trouble and expense of legal communications if they don't want to, they can just cancel your domain registration. End of story. Except in this case the lawyer would have to drop-catch the name to get it back.

Those of you who don't like the tone of the lawyer's email, you could also just cancel the registration then tell the lawyer the cancellation is irreversible so he should dropcatch it or go argue with Godaddy. I think this happened with a Trump domain.

 

[Acroplex]

Kate put plenty of intuitive feedback in her responses, echoing 15 years of active domain investing.

Like most things in life, one needs to pick their battles. Consider the $20 spent on this "investment" to be a very cheap lesson.

 

[Sterling]

Yea, I would take Kates advice. People that signed up in 2015 and 2016 have little or no knowledge of our business with advice like that.

I have actual experience, trust Kates words.

What no one has asked is, did you really not know this was a former lawyers domain? Really? Did you blindly register the name without doing your homework first?

I believe he did do his homework, knew this was a lawyers former domain and looked to make a quick few hundred dollars.

Next time, take this as a lesson.

 

[B0NES]

Get a cat, name it 'the last name.'
Make up some BS blog about your cat.

 

[Mr. Deleted]

Mess with a lawyer ? Wonderful advice... it's like daring him to take you to court.

Under ACPA you can be fined to the tune of up to 100K per infringing domain. It doesn't happen often but it could.
I doubt the name is worth fighting for. You sure had a good reason to pick this domain, and maybe it is one that the lawyer could actually grasp even if he doesn't like it ?

I am not so sure, it all depends on if it was trademarked. Also, did the new buyer know of such a trademark?

 

[Dave_Z]

He needs a lesson. And best lessons learned the hard way.

Another lesson one can learn is to exercise care on who to heed, especially if that who loses nothing and that one might.

Anywho, glad to see the OP is able to resolve his or her issue without further trouble. I'm also glad that other, more experienced people shared their insights that help the OP to decide better.

And I think some---if not all---of us can be glad that we (re)learned some thing/s here.