events I AM LAMBO

[lambo.com]

Hello frens,

I AM LAMBO of LAMBO.com and I will defend, defeat and humiliate those endeavouring to steal any of my domain name brands - including my moniker.

We have stood by in meek positioning watching poor decisions, one after another, rendered typically by "SOLE PANELISTS" - albeit with exceptions and inconsistency.

Digital assets stripped from legal holders and registrants who immediately (apparently), default to defensive posturing against Reverse Domain Name Hijackers (RDNH).

The injustice propagated against domain investors, speculators and BUILDERS - will not continue as it has.

In my case, a car company called "Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A." is attempting THEFT of my asset, nomenclature and taxonomy they possess ZERO rights to.

https://www.udrpsearch.com/wipo/d2022-1570

Counter measures to humiliate such endeavours are afoot. Unlawful theft will be duly punished through legal and commensurate counter efforts including any coerced and submissive accomplices.

Humiliation is inevitable should they desire METAWAR, even as the car company, NISSAN, found out with NISSAN.com
https://web.archive.org/web/20200131113518/https://www.nissan.com/

This is enough for now, I will continue to update as necessary.

In the meanwhile, you can add me on lichess (@lamboDOTcom).

We will save our industry from the filth that seeks to dismember it's legitimacy.

Thank you for time and God Bless. May the VRIL be with you.

 

[xynames]

Losing a motion to dismiss, assuming that happens, and losing the case are two very different things.

At the end of the day, lambo must think it's worth it to him to pursue all this. If he wins, and gets attorney's fees and costs - all good. If he wins, and gets nothing, probably more of a pyrrhic victory, given that the entire potential upside dollar wise would be selling the domain for his asking price of $50K.

I like to get right to the heart of the matter. Other than "principle" his upside is $50K. His downside is probably about the same in attorney's fees and costs.

In these sorts of disputes sometimes the only winners are the attorneys. Both Lamborghini and lambo probably want to make a statement of that they won't be pushed around.

As a fellow domainer I have to tip my hat to lambo for standing his ground, but dollars and cents wise it may not be the best business decision.

Compare for example to the battle over sex.com where millions were at stake and, without even considering who was right and who was wrong (obviously the thief who stole it was in the wrong), both sides had a lot to lose, as well as gain. That's the sort of thing you spend time and money fighting over.

 

[jberryhill]

Other than "principle" his upside is $50K. His downside is probably about the same in attorney's fees and costs.

The downside is potentially a lot larger than that. Lamborghini is certain to lose the motion to dismiss, as their argument verges on frivolous. Absent a settlement after that point, they will file a counterclaim for cybersquatting seeking the statutory damages of up to $100k plus attorney fees.

 

[xynames]

I'm just considering the straight loss of lambo loses his lawsuit, or wins and gets nothing. But typically yes in many lawsuits there are counterclaims filed, although generally the counterclaim is weaker than the straight defense to the claim itself, and often just used to try to bully the plaintiff. And again, the attorneys end up the winners!

Maybe lambo is judgment proof and would never have to pay, who knows. But because lambo has made such a public spectacle of the matter, if Lamborghini does win they'd probably work harder than most in these types of actions to try to collect on any judgment.

 

[xynames]

By the way, and again, I have not read this thread and don't know anything about lambo but - where is he? He uses British/Australian spelling "endeavouring" but his action is in the U.S.?

 

[jberryhill]

but - where is he?

That is stated in Paragraph 2 of the Complaint. The thread about the litigation is here: https://www.namepros.com/threads/la...nt-files-lawsuit-against-lamborghini.1281970/

There have been instances in which the INS has attempted to use adverse civil judgments as evidence of lack of good moral character for the purpose of denying citizenship applications. I do not know if they have made similar assessments in the context of other types of visas or residency permits.

 

[Jv1999]

i hope lambo wins.

I'm not convinced that lambo should be strictly reserved for this car co especially when Blair had kept it solely within domaining... he never advertised cars or tried to represent that the domain was for cars. It's just lambo.

So I'm included to disagree wholeheartedly.

And the truth is, the car co decided it needed the .com... so stealing it was their way to do it. That's pretty underhanded.

They should have offered him like twice the cost of the UDRP before filing the UDRP and that should have been the end of it.

 

[jberryhill]

They should have offered him like twice the cost of the UDRP before filing the UDRP

Why?

https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/pdf/2022/d2022-1570.pdf

The disputed domain has, until recently, resolved to a web page at which it has been offered for sale at a price of EUR 25,0000,000 or to lease at a monthly price of EUR 541,667.

 

[Mize]

Someone just needs to ask Lamborghini if there are Multiple Potential Buyers for lambo.com that are not related to their company.

 

[Jv1999]

Why?

https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/pdf/2022/d2022-1570.pdf

The disputed domain has, until recently, resolved to a web page at which it has been offered for sale at a price of EUR 25,0000,000 or to lease at a monthly price of EUR 541,667.

Because, before suing someone, you're supposed to send some kind of demand letter or something.

They should try to show some sort of morality by first trying to purchase the domain for UDRP cost or a little above that. Only if that failed should they have filed something.

Unless attempting to purchase the domain becomes evidence that they don't truly believe they owned the rights to it in the first place.

 

[jberryhill]

Because, before suing someone, you're supposed to send some kind of demand letter or something.

There is no requirement to do that.

They should try to show some sort of morality by first trying to purchase the domain for UDRP cost or a little above that.

The domain was priced at 25M. A UDRP costs around $5000.

Someone just needs to ask Lamborghini if there are Multiple Potential Buyers for lambo.com that are not related to their company.

How many of them do you suppose have 25M euro to spend on a domain name?

 

[Jv1999]

There is no requirement to do that.



The domain was priced at 25M. A UDRP costs around $5000.



How many of them do you suppose have 25M euro to spend on a domain name?

The millions in price is obviously a smoke screen for negotiation, and the car company would know that.

My issue is, they didn't try offering to purchase it first. They could've offered the $5000 (i thoguht it was $1,000, i guess the cost has gone up like everything else). They could've offered also 10k. That's how you amicably settle things, with communication and some kind of offering.

Instead they went head on with a udrp.

 

[xynames]

Lol I just realized that he’s not asking $50K he’s asking USD $50M for the domain. So in theory $50M is his potential upside.

With that list price an argument could be made that the domain isn’t really for sale. Sometimes I list developed websites of mine that I don’t plan to sell at buy it now prices that are absurdly inflated knowing no one will ever pay that but leaving the door open to an offer just in case. This “isn’t seriously for sale” argument cuts both ways pro lambo and pro Lamborghini depending on how you look at it.

Again I haven’t read the thread but I assume there was some kind of email or letter sent asking lambo to release the domain. Seeing what a hot head lambo is maybe instead of just ignoring the communication which is often the best advice if you’re not willing to fight maybe lambo wrote back with some testosterone laced statement of principle that got Lamborghini to think, “Forget this guy - we’re going to court.” Remember also that you’re dealing with Italians. Italians have a reputation for thinking always that their way is the only and right way even if no one else is doing it that way. Just examine the suspension system on an old Alfa Romeo sometime you’ll understand what I mean.

By the way auto correct at this very website namepros will change the word lambo to Lamborghini.

 

[Mize]

How many of them do you suppose have 25M euro to spend on a domain name?

0 or 3 or 9, its not possible to know. Should default to a price rule:

maybe something like: The future price a buyer is willing to pay is not known. Offer price is at the discretion of the seller. Domain may never be sold.

For domains which have sold at the highest prices: is one able to 1. Know who the buyer would be before it was sold 2. Know the price the domain would sell for 3. Know the price the buyer was willing to pay 4. Know the highest price another potential buyer would pay 5. Know if a company will be created tomorrow who would also want the domain.

 

[Keith]

Has the OP ever used the domain or shown intent? I only ask because a $50 million price point is certainly geared towards one company and it’s Lamborghini. They wouldn’t pay a fraction of that to own the domain imo. Maybe $250k…

I do think the OP has rights to own this domain. Hopefully it gets settled in court!

 

[Mize]

Has the OP ever used the domain or shown intent?

if an investor: Intent would be to buy something and sell it at a higher price.

Maybe defense could be something simple:

domain investor

domain has value to multiple potential buyers

domain not being used to infringe on a trademark

(offer price should not matter and registrant should be able to offer to sell domain to whomever they want regardless of trademarks [due to there are multiple potential buyers AND trademarks not infringed])

 

[lambo.com]

Which might be an intellectual property infringment?

 

[Mize]

If one:

Targets Lamborghini directly; Targets every company/person who may see value in the domain directly (trademark or not); Hopes that anyone who values the domain that can’t be directly targeted contacts you before you sell it to someone else.

Is there anything that technically prevents one from doing the above?

Given the following 3 are true:

1. domain investor

2. domain has value to multiple potential buyers

3. domain not being used to infringe on a trademark

Does anyone know what prevents this?

 

[nnzo]

except one thing, should be 15m not 25m thats all. good luck.

It's now listed @ 50 million

 

[WingShot]

Lambo, it's probably not a great idea to publicly discuss pending litigation publicly anyway. Of course, opposing counsel will ask interrogatories and deposition questions, but that's in a limited and controlled atmosphere. Outside of these limited inquiries, opposing counsel should not hear or see you speak on matters related to the case. You might be surprised at how statements can be twisted later and alternative interpretations of your words presented. Threads here can create fodder for depositions and trial testimony. It's just not a great idea.

 

[Samer]

To the Supreme Court!!!
They will rule 9-0 in your favor, @lambo.com

Good luck, mate.

 

[lambo.com]

You might be surprised at how statements can be twisted later and alternative interpretations of your words presented.

You might be surprised at how BASED Lambo is in jurisprudence, SPELL-ings, legal fictions, admiralty law etc.

For example:

"I DO NOT CONSENT" [AYE DUE KNOT CON-SE'-ENT]

where "aye" means yes, affirmative and tacit agreement instantly, "due", as in debt tacit agreement, "knot", as in tied and BO-uND, tacit agreement to slavery and "con-" (means both with/for AND against/without equally as a prefix, also means thief or criminal in common vernacular terms etc.), " se' " is Latin for "himself, herself, itself" which is the entire essence of the speaker involved, and "- ent" is a suffix meaning "mind" etymologically.

 

[jberryhill]

admiralty law

Wow. I'll bet that comes in really handy in trademark disputes.

 

[BaileyUK]

Not sure how much it pertains to this particular case. But I believe one of the lessons I picked up many moons ago from Mr Berryhill, was that - An aggrieved party considering raising a UDRP could not realistically enter into any negotiations to purchase a domain without thereby acknowledging the registrants right to ownership. I'm really only referring to those that felt there was a negotiated settlement opportunity missed.

As much as I would like to see lambo win. I think that temporary price tag of the multi-millions kind-of seals the ultimate outcome here of trying to profit from an established TM albeit a popular synonym of that trademark.

I do realise that is not the substance of the case in court. and It is in regard to the interpretation and application of the procedure

 

[silentg]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1663993983167594498

 

[jberryhill]

@silentg there is a separate thread for the litigation: https://www.namepros.com/threads/la...nt-files-lawsuit-against-lamborghini.1281970/