NameSilo

Mike Mann lost LakesGas .com at the WIPO (ridiculous!)

Labeled as news in Domain Industry News started by gipson, Jul 3, 2019.

Replies:
91
Views:
4,877

  1. gipson

    gipson Next Domain Market VIP

    Posts:
    1,852
    Likes Received:
    2,183
    Mike Mann‘s asking price of $94,888 dollars for the domain LakesGas.com was referred to as “exorbitantly high” by the sole panelist at the WIPO who handled the UDRP.

    and “This Panel takes notice that the estimated fair market value for this disputed domain name ranges from about USD 650 to about 2,300.”


    Source: https://domaingang.com/domain-law/mike-mann-lost-udrp-over-generic-domain-lakesgas-com-at-the-wipo/


    Comment : Everyone has lost here, no only Mike Mann.

    We already knew that we were not sure, but this is an open statement of how much danger there is right now
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2019
    The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
  2. Silentptnr

    Silentptnr Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    12,205
    Likes Received:
    30,975
  3. MadAboutDomains

    MadAboutDomains Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    2,922
    Likes Received:
    746
    Estimated fair market value is whatever the market will bear. Pegging a value in the $x,xxx is arbitrary at best.
     
  4. jamesosix

    jamesosix Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    810
    Likes Received:
    706
    hope for my sh*t domains yet then haha.
     
  5. infosec3

    infosec3 BrandSearching.COM JUST LAUNCHED Gold Account VIP

    Posts:
    4,607
    Likes Received:
    3,043
    So now WIPO decisions have become a form of domain price regulation?
     
  6. Jv1999

    Jv1999 Spamming Exo: Dark Merc of the Exo-Tower VIP

    Posts:
    2,584
    Likes Received:
    2,451
    I dunno what sort of clown judges decide udrp cases, but mike Mann needs to appeal this.. too bad most domainers are allergic to retaining lawyers. Guess it comes with the wheeling and dealing mentality.

    A panel of NEUTRAL judges are experts at law, they are not competent to ARBITRARILY decide the value of a domain. Any lawyer who took at least one class, even an online J.D. class, would know that you need a qualified expert to decide the industry standard for an industry!

    And even if the panel were domainers (LOL THEY R NOT), it's just fkn inappropriate of them to step in and act as an expert witness. That s definitely not being neutral.

    O my gad I gave a legal opinion, now gimme $800.
     
  7. MadAboutDomains

    MadAboutDomains Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    2,922
    Likes Received:
    746
    I'd like to see the formula that the guy used to calculate the price.
     
  8. tonyk2000

    tonyk2000 Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,116
    Likes Received:
    1,391
    Brian J. Winterfeldt
    Sole Panelist
    Date: June 21, 2019

    (quote end).

    A domainer should always order (and, yes, pay for) 3 members panel. Why did mr. Mann fail to do this? Any lost UDRP can be subsequently used against the Respondent (domainer) in other cases: "the Respondent is a proven cybersquatter, as found in other UDRP cases blah-blah-blah"

    Panelist Winterfeldt, however, gained more customers. More Complainants will now request this panelist in 3-member panels. Pure business...
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2019
  9. tonyk2000

    tonyk2000 Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,116
    Likes Received:
    1,391
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2019
  10. korganian

    korganian Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    2,260
    The asking price of the seller should not even be a factor in the judge's decision!!!
     
  11. Remi

    Remi Established Member

    Posts:
    255
    Likes Received:
    25
  12. Internet.Domains

    Internet.Domains Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    3,716
    So we have entered an era where if a domain has an asking price above an appraisal tool it is subject to loss. Sad. Truly sad.
     
  13. MadAboutDomains

    MadAboutDomains Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    2,922
    Likes Received:
    746
    The panelist didn't say that though...
     
  14. DomainNameBroker.com

    DomainNameBroker.com Domain Name Broker, LLC VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,034
    Likes Received:
    336
    You can't win'em all.
     
  15. korganian

    korganian Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    2,260
    Actually that's exactly what the moron panelist said because he used that opinion to rule "bad faith" which was the foundation of his decision to transfer the domain. This panelist needs to be sued himself and barred from ever being a panelist again.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2019
  16. tonyk2000

    tonyk2000 Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,116
    Likes Received:
    1,391
    Well, every domainer has right to price domains as he likes. High Prices and low number of sales? Let it be so, if it works for this or that portfolio. Lower prices and higher number of sales? Let it be so. May work for somebody else.

    I personally do not think that the domain in question, lakesgas, might receive a lot of (or any) attention should it be included into dropping list. Must have been a handreg by the current registrant. But we should admit that it was worth at least $1500 UDRP fee (as well as lawyers fees) for at least one enduser, who elected to submit the Complaint.

    Domain trash king? Mr. Mann? One and only "domain trash king" is somebody... huge... definitely not mr. Mann. Imho. But discussing another registrant would be offtopic in this thread.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2019
  17. Kingslayer

    Kingslayer Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,571
    Likes Received:
    3,808
    I see both sides to this, the domain belonged to M. Mann, he is/was the rightful owner and should never have had it took from him, but same time his asking price was unrealistic.

    99.9% of this forum wouldn't value that domain $95k, so if that's the case and he's valuing the domain x100-x200 of it's actual worth, it's being unreasonable and extorting if you will.

    I don't think there's anything to worry about personally as far a as trend going due to this part:-

    "But this specific combination of words together has no real descriptive or generic meaning, and really only has meaning in the context of Complainant’s trademark.”

    Most people do value their assets competitively (maybe slightly higher), i think problem is valuing x100 higher for something low class/reg fee.

    M. Mann has made a living of doing that though, so maybe that could be a problem for him in the future if potential buyers of his assets look at this case.
     
  18. Jasonn

    Jasonn Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,124
    Likes Received:
    775
    So now domains must be sold for "fair market value"? Whatever that is. What a joke.
     
  19. MapleDots

    MapleDots Domain Properties 2010 - 2019 VIP

    Posts:
    4,951
    Likes Received:
    9,985
    Not so sure I agree with you on this one.

    Am I the only one that sees what the panelist did?
    I think there is definitely some merit to this decision.


    =====================================================================
    Complainant contends the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights. Complainant asserts that its trademark and tradename LAKES GAS has been used for almost sixty years, being first used in 1959, long before the January 8, 2011 registration of the disputed domain name by Respondent. Complainant further asserts that the addition of the top-level domain name is not a defense to a finding of confusing similarity between the disputed domain name and the Complainant’s LAKES GAS trademark.

    Complainant asserts that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. Complainant asserts Respondent does not have any applications or registrations for LAKES GAS nor is it commonly known by the name “Lakes Gas.” Complainant further asserts Respondent does not use and is not preparing to use the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services, or making legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name. Complainant contends the disputed domain name promotes or suggests a connection or relationship between Respondent and Complainant. Complainant asserts the unauthorized use of Complainant’s mark in the disputed domain name undermines a claim of bona fide use under the Policy. Complainant asserts that Respondent chose to register the disputed domain name because of its significance vis-à-vis Complainant’s LAKES GAS trademark and Complainant’s associated goodwill and reputation.

    ======================================================================



    As a domainer I hope to never be in a similar position but in this particular case Mann should have seen the obvious and released the domain at market value.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2019
  20. NameDeck

    NameDeck Design. Develop. Deploy. VIP

    Posts:
    1,956
    Likes Received:
    843
    I agree. Could've seen it coming.

    He's got some other domains that I wouldn't touch so this one doesn't come as a surprise to me.

    Anyway,If you hold a portfolio this size you're bound to own some domains that would most likely be in danger. It comes with the territory.
     
  21. Internet.Domains

    Internet.Domains Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    3,716
    And who gets to decide what is fair market value?
    Appraisal tools?
    Complainant?
    Domain owner?

    And should the market value actually determine rights to a domain?

    Going down this rabbit hole is going to get messy.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2019
  22. Goku

    Goku Established Member ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    190
    Likes Received:
    113
    So a bucket of water was taken from an ocean, not a big deal. He'd probably make up more from this news.
     
  23. MapleDots

    MapleDots Domain Properties 2010 - 2019 VIP

    Posts:
    4,951
    Likes Received:
    9,985
    The name was in use since 1959

    There is no logical explanation why Lakes and gas was used in combination other than to sell it to the end user who has been using the name since 1959. It makes no sense in any other way and in my opinion the panelist that made the judgement saw this and ruled against Mr Mann.

    I hate to say it..... believe me I hate saying it but.... in my opinion the panelist made the correct decision.
     
  24. Internet.Domains

    Internet.Domains Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    3,716
    Fair enough. I have to say I have seen more disturbing decisions over the years. Although, the mention of price by the panelist sets a new precedent that is most disturbing in itself.
     
  25. biggie

    biggie Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    9,376
    Likes Received:
    8,451

Want to reply or ask your own question?

It only takes a minute to sign up – and it's free!
Topics / Tags:

Share This Page

NameWorth
  1. NamePros uses cookies and similar technologies. By using this site, you are agreeing to our privacy policy, terms, and use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
Loading...