Legal Repercussions of the new gTLDs -- Howard Neu Weighs In

[Ms Domainer]

*

This might be a series worth following as Howard Neu examines the legal repercussions of the URS option in his article "DOMAINERS BEWARE! The new gTLD extensions are all subject to the new URS. How will that effect you?":

http://neusnews.com/?p=588​

I fear that large companies will go after one-word generics, even if the domain owner isn't squatting on that specific brand.

I am going to follow this series very carefully.

*

 

[Keith]

*

This might be a series worth following as Howard Neu examines the legal repercussions of the URS option in his article "DOMAINERS BEWARE! The new gTLD extensions are all subject to the new URS. How will that effect you?":

http://neusnews.com/?p=588​

I fear that large companies will go after one-word generics, even if the domain owner isn't squatting on that specific brand.

I am going to follow this series very carefully.

*

Does this process put more money in the pocket of icann? Hmm...

 

[Ms Domainer]

Does this process put more money in the pocket of icann? Hmm...

*

I wonder.

But here's the thing: if this URS is too strict, domainers -- and even end users -- will refrain from registering and setting up businesses on sites that can be snatched by an a$$hat company that TMs something like "Open" or "Face."

This URS policy could have a cascading effect because if no one regs these properties for URS fears, then the registries will go under.

In that case, everyone can pack up and go home.

*

 

[alien51]

I bet a good strategy to use by domainers, is to put up a landing page that will give the illusion of "legitimate and fair use" as a front. Then do your aftermarket stuffs in the background. That's the only solution i can think of to thwart a TM holder.

Also the apparent URS rules say: "....faster path to relief for rights holders experiencing the most clear-cut cases of infringement. "
I would take that the bold fonts above would refer to such infringing matches like Toyota, Samsung, Boeing, etc. But not the generic word combination types.

 

[Name Trader]

most clear-cut cases of infringement.

Yeah. We'll see how that works out over time.

 

[carob]

It contains a potential improvement according to that article

Unlike the UDRP, there is a built-in appellate process which we shall discuss at length in a future article

It isn't only domainers who can lose domains - someone may register a domain for later use and be slow setting up a business or site, or may just use the domain for an email address.

 

[alien51]

someone may register a domain for later use and be slow setting up a business or site

However, "slow" is a subjective English word. Does that mean 6 months? 1 year? 5 years? Rules cannot be based on subjective criteria.

or may just use the domain for an email address.

That is legitimate and fair use.

 

[Ms Domainer]

Link to Part II

*

Here is part II of Neu's article:

http://neusnews.com/?p=595​

*

 

[DnEbook]

I wonder how redirects to relevant sites are treated?

 

[jmcc]

I bet a good strategy to use by domainers, is to put up a landing page that will give the illusion of "legitimate and fair use" as a front. Then do your aftermarket stuffs in the background. That's the only solution i can think of to thwart a TM holder.

Putting up a landing page with PPC advertising on it would not be such a good idea as there are decisions where this was used as evidence of profiting from a brand/trademark. A plain landing page with no advertising might be better. However it would be better to seek a proper, paid, legal opinion rather than relying on anything on a forum.

Regards...jmcc

 

[Ms Domainer]

Link to Part III

*

http://neusnews.com/?p=601​

There will be a part IV.

*

 

[mhdoc]

Putting up a landing page with PPC advertising on it would not be such a good idea as there are decisions where this was used as evidence of profiting from a brand/trademark. A plain landing page with no advertising might be better. However it would be better to seek a proper, paid, legal opinion rather than relying on anything on a forum.

Regards...jmcc

In situations like this where there is no established case law, I am not sure a "proper, paid, legal opinion" has much value either. In the end, the strength of a legal opinion comes down to how much Errors & Omissions insurance the attorney has and/or the net worth of their corporate entity.

In the US at least, I think setting up your own asset protection system is a stronger defense.

 

[Ms Domainer]

Link to Part IV

*

The URS process and appeal:

http://neusnews.com/?p=605​

*