question I need an explanation on cybersquatting

[Michael Oje]

I recently registered a plural domain (wasn't aware the singular version existed). I listed it at the marketplace and did outbounding. I later received a reply from one of the potential end users I reached (apparently the owner of the singular version), accusing me of cybersquatting. He offered to buy the Domain at $20 but I rejected. He has retained a lawyer who mailed me and wants to make a case. Please what can I do? Thanks as I await good responses.
Note: I've checked and the domain name) singular) is not trademarked.

---

Related: Wikipedia on Cybersquatting

 

[Michael Oje]

Thanks everyone,

 

[Ategy]

@Michael Oje .. you should remove the domain from the above post (you can only edit posts for 30 minutes after posting). This thread could indeed be used against you in court.

That being said .. it really is a boarderline case. I definitely would consider the middle word to be an industry term in that context. But it the city+term combination that could still be considered "unique" to a judge or panellist. Although in theory I'd think location would not be considered part of the equation since that too is not something usually trademarkable (city+boat would probably not be protected by trademark in my opinion .. but you never know). I'm actually curious to see a legal professional's opinion on this as to me it really could go either way. One of those situations where likely you could get different decisions depending on the judge or panellist.

Anyhow .. be sure to edit out the full domain from the above post .. and everybody else .. for the sake of Michael .. do NOT quote his domain!

 

[maya-zir]

I told him make jpg with the name and use it to show the domain..
This way it is always possible to delete the image from the link...

 

[Michael Oje]

I

@Michael Oje .. you should remove the domain from the above post (you can only edit posts for 30 minutes after posting). This thread could indeed be used against you in court.

That being said .. it really is a boarderline case. I definitely would consider the middle word to be an industry term in that context. But it the city+term combination that could still be considered "unique" to a judge or panellist. Although in theory I'd think location would not be considered part of the equation since that too is not something usually trademarkable (city+boat would probably not be protected by trademark in my opinion .. but you never know). I'm actually curious to see a legal professional's opinion on this as to me it really could go either way. One of those situations where likely you could get different decisions depending on the judge or panellist.

Anyhow .. be sure to edit out the full domain from the above post .. and everybody else .. for the sake of Michael .. do NOT quote his domain!

I sincerely appreciate. I've edited the post

 

[Ategy]

I told him make jpg with the name and use it to show the domain..
This way it is always possible to delete the image from the link...

As much as we absolutely need to know the name to really give the best advice possible .. even that isn't a good idea .. people could write it in their replies .. waybackmachine could get in a snapshot, etc etc.

As much as it sucks, it's always best to keep it secret from everyone but your legal council and your dog!

 

[maya-zir]

As much as we absolutely need to know the name to really give the best advice possible .. even that isn't a good idea .. people could write it in their replies .. waybackmachine could get in a snapshot, etc etc.

As much as it sucks, it's always best to keep it secret from everyone but your legal council and your dog!

Well, if upload it just for a day, I dont think it will cause a problem..
Anyway, in this case I use my host to upload the image and then just delete it from my host, leaving the broken link to nowhere..

 

[xynames]

Can’t help you without knowing exact name but don’t blame you for not posting it publicly. As far as one on one help privately the only ones who would do that for free wouldn’t know for sure anyway.

Sorry but this vague thread is a waste of your time and ours.

 

[alcy]

its weird that they never reg the name when its available for regfee.. but then send lawyers when someone else regs it.

 

[maya-zir]

its weird that they never reg the name when its available for regfee.. but then send lawyers when someone else regs it.

Plural was registered back in 2008.
In 2009 it was used for the same business as now singular.
Maybe it was thier or maybe it was somebody else business.
From 2011 it was used for affiliate links and ads.
From 2017 it was on sale.

Singular was registered in 2014.
From 2015 existd as acual website.

 

[alcy]

Plural was registered back in 2008.
In 2009 it was used for the same business as now singular.
Maybe it was thier or maybe it was somebody else business.
From 2011 it was used for affiliate links and ads.
From 2017 it was on sale.

Singular was registered in 2014.
From 2015 existd as acual website.

ok ty
still if op was able to reg it then anyone else was also.

so just reg your stuff when its available to reg.. or remembver to renew it.
and stop coming after domainers with lawyers

 

[maya-zir]

I hate persons who reg generic names and then try to TM them..
Want to be unique? Find your unique name and domain and use generic ones for leads.

 

[frank-germany]

how can you guys ask somebody in legal trouble
to post the name in question here?

as soon as he types it in here its published in googles database forever

on some websites its like typing it into google itself
( try wikipedia)

NEVER post a domain here when you have legal issues or expect them

 

[maya-zir]

how can you guys ask somebody in legal trouble
to post the name in question here?

as soon as he types it in here its published in googles database forever

on some websites its like typing it into google itself
( try wikipedia)

NEVER post a domain here when you have legal issues or expect them

How you expect to give advice if you dont know the name?
There are a lot of way to to show the name without post it

 

[karmaco]

Check for trademark conflicts before you register names in the future. The problem here is you contacted them to sell the name. That in itself looks like cyber squatting and bad intentions to approach a trademark holder. When in doubt —do not contact and do not put on page with ads.

It might be less of a problem to just give them the name for a nominal fee.

 

[Kate]

Indeed, this can give the impression that the domain was registered for the sole purpose of selling it to the TM holder, although the OP said he reached out to several potential end users. But this is something that the TM holder may not know. Instead they may feel like they are the sole target.
But like JBH would say, domainers are too often under the impression that there is no TM if the TM is not registered and this is wrong. Likewise, you don't necessarily need a registered TM to file a UDRP against someone - and prevail.

Another example of outbound gone wrong.

 

[jberryhill]

Note: I've checked and the domain name) singular) is not trademarked.

Michael, I'd like to ask you a question, if you don't mind, and get your gut reaction to it.

Let's say that you open up a restaurant in your town. You invest your life savings into that restaurant, and you open up "Michael Oje's Barbecue Grill". Your restaurant takes off and becomes very popular.

I move into your town, and then I open a restaurant down the block from you. I call my restaurant "Michael Oje's Pizza Oven" and I have online ordering at MichaelOje.com.

Would that bother you?

Do you think you'd be able to do anything about it, even if you had not registered a trademark anywhere?

 

[xynames]

What Berryhill is getting at, which he has a valid point, is that cybersquatting hinges on a "bad faith" use of the domain, specifically, "a bad faith intent to profit." Just because someone has a trademark or does not have a trademark on the name is not the end of the inquiry.

If you want to go down the line and consider the elements that are examined in such cases:
https://revisionlegal.com/copyright-infringement/cybersquatting-and-the-bad-faith-intent-to-profit/

but anyway, as I posted above:

Can’t help you without knowing exact name but don’t blame you for not posting it publicly. As far as one on one help privately the only ones who would do that for free wouldn’t know for sure anyway.

 

[Michael Oje]

I think I need to add that the domain was actually registered by me after it expired. It was formerly in use by someone/organisation. It's not a new domain at all.

 

[jberryhill]

What Berryhill is getting at, which he has a valid point..

 

[maya-zir]

Michael, I'd like to ask you a question, if you don't mind, and get your gut reaction to it.

Let's say that you open up a restaurant in your town. You invest your life savings into that restaurant, and you open up "Michael Oje's Barbecue Grill". Your restaurant takes off and becomes very popular.

I move into your town, and then I open a restaurant down the block from you. I call my restaurant "Michael Oje's Pizza Oven" and I have online ordering at MichaelOje.com.

Would that bother you?

Do you think you'd be able to do anything about it, even if you had not registered a trademark anywhere?

It was not "Michael Oje's Barbecue Grill", it was just "Our city Barbecue Grill".
And I tell you something more...
If you open your business and want to be unique or TM, pay for a good domain and dont reg free GENERIC wrods trying to TM them...