domain lowes.com.mx, retailer wants to buy please help

[ricoyr]

I own the .mx domain for retailer Lowe's, their lawyers offered to buy it but I have no idea how much to ask for it, please help all comments helpful
thanks!

 

[skatona]

You can be sued for TRYING to make a profit - but never receiving $1 ? How was Lowe's negatively affected by him making zero money? He didn't steal business. He didn't do business as them. What sort of damages could they ever sue for? I can see them sueing for the name, but that's about it.

Now if money was being made, and the content on the page was very similar to the business Lowe's Hardware conducts - there's trouble ahead. If it's a blog about puppies, he'll get a slap on the hand and have to give the name over maybe.

In the end, I'm no expert. But this just seems like common sense. I'm very interested in the outcome.

 

[Rich_H]

You can be sued for TRYING to make a profit - but never receiving $1 ? How was Lowe's negatively affected by him making zero money? He didn't steal business. He didn't do business as them. What sort of damages could they ever sue for? I can see them sueing for the name, but that's about it.

Now if money was being made, and the content on the page was very similar to the business Lowe's Hardware conducts - there's trouble ahead. If it's a blog about puppies, he'll get a slap on the hand and have to give the name over maybe.

In the end, I'm no expert. But this just seems like common sense. I'm very interested in the outcome.

It doesn't have anything to do with whether he was making money, it's whether the name was registered in "bad faith" (see above).

If you register a trademarked name hoping that the owners will eventually pay you for that name, you are cybersquatting, no matter what the content (if any) of your site.

You are describing a textbook scenario of cybersquatting. The typical cybersquatter thinks "I'll reg this well known company's name, put up a blog about puppies, and they'll have to pay an arm and a leg to get it from me. If it looks like I'll be sued, I'll just give it up. No harm, no foul".

As far as the "no harm no foul" argument, you think those corporate attorneys work pro bono? They've probably already spent at least 4 figures on the minimal contact they've made. And, as I stated above, it's their responsibility to aggresively defend their trademarks.

I hope it works out and they give big bucks for the name, they may decide it's cheaper to buy it than sue.

I wouldn't want to be in that situation.

Rich

 

[Rogor]

I'm new at this too ricoyr, but I've been doing a ton of reading, and IMHO you would do well to heed the advice of the senior members. As I understand it, (not being a lawyer, mind you) The panel that will determine who is entitled to the name (WIPO) uses these three criteria to make their decision-
1 that the trademark owner owns a trademark (either registered or unregistered) that is the same or confusingly similar to the registered second level domain name;
2 that the party that registered the domain name has no legitimate right or interest in the domain name; and
3 that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith.
...after that it could go to a court as well.
I would be concerned about the "confusingly similar" part, the other two seem to be a good fit too. Before you do anything take a look at the legal issues & disputes forum. particular attention to posts by fonzie 007, DNquest, and labrocca, they have been very helpful to me. BTW my thanks to them.
good luck