My first UDRP case - settled.

[AdoptableDomains]

Last month, I had my first UDRP case filed against me. It was on a 3 letter .us domain, and the complainant was a US based university who used the .edu of the same three letter acronym. In researching, I found they had also recently filed and had been awarded the .com in a default case, and there were pending filings on the .org and .net as well.

Inititally, It didn't look very good. Even though I didn't have a whole lot of money in the domain that I purchased on an auction, I wasn't going to roll over and give them a default win without a fight. I did a lot of research and gave a very good argument and supporting case history on every charge they made. Since they had all the other filings, I also made a claim of reverse domain hijacking, and filed my response.

Within a day of my response, but before it was heard by an arbitrator, I was called by their attorney and made an offer of what was claimed to be less than their attorney fees to proceed in the amount of $200 in exchange for them withdrawing the UDRP case with prejudice (meaning they couldn't refile). I accepted their modest offer, even though it was tempting to see if I would win the case.

I'm pretty sure they thought I had a fair shot at winning, or they would likely have just held out for the decision at that point. I really think they were a little surprised to get a UDRP response. I do avoid anything that could be construed as bad faith, so they really didn't have a cut-and-dry case either, even though they held a US trademark on the 3 letter acronym for eductional services.

Since my case, the .org has now gone to them by default without a response filed from that owner. The .net is still pending, and the only one they haven't gone after with a UDRP is the .biz (yet).

My point in this post, is that by not acting in bad faith, you have some ground to stand on to make a response if the name could truly be used as generic in some way. It also shows that by not responding, you are almost sure to lose and have a case with your name permanantly on public file. In this case, I did spend a lot of time drafting my response, but did recover through a mutually beneficial and amicable trasaction. I also made sure to get a release of liability in the deal.

I only got about 1/4 of my asking price, but most deals end up at about half asking anyway if negotiated. I gained some UDRP procedure experience should this ever happen again, and I don't have a "lost case" on file. For the other side, they have the domain they wanted, paid less than their lawyers would have charged to continue, and didn't risk losing the case (which I believe was a reasonably high probability). In all, it was pretty much a win-win situtation.

If you truly are not acting in bad faith, it IS worthwhile to file an intelligent well supported response.

I won't mention the actual domain here, but it isn't that hard to figure out from recent public UDRP filings for the truly curious.

 

[Chromis]

My point in this post, is that by not acting in bad faith, you have some ground to stand on to make a response if the name could truly be used as generic in some way. It also shows that by not responding, you are almost sure to lose and have a case with your name permanantly on public file. In this case, I did spend a lot of time drafting my response, but did recover through a mutually beneficial and amicable trasaction. I also made sure to get a release of liability in the deal.

Good information, thanks.. It is nice to see the little man not getting shafted too bad.. good point also.. Thanks for the extra reminder..

 

[NP41215]

Within a day of my response, but before it was heard by an arbitrator, I was called by their attorney and made an offer of what was claimed to be less than their attorney fees to proceed in the amount of $200 in exchange for them withdrawing the UDRP case with prejudice (meaning they couldn't refile). I accepted their modest offer, even though it was tempting to see if I would win the case./QUOTE]

I think you should have held out for more. Chances are the lawyer would have lost and come back with many times greater offer.

 

[Wanda]

Thankyou Mark..
for sharing your story / experience.

You did the *right thing*.. solely because
you now, feel good about how it all turned out..
and that's all that really matters....
at the end of the day..

 

[AdoptableDomains]

I think you should have held out for more. Chances are the lawyer would have lost and come back with many times greater offer.

Maybe, but you just never know. If I'd held out for more, they may have proceeded on principal with a big IP law firm on their side. Even though I was fairly confident, with a single person panel (I didn't want to pay for a 3-panel), you never know how one individual arbitrator feel or will decide. If by chance I got an unfriendly one, I could have lost the domain without compensation and had the permanant lost UDRP case record, to be potentially used against me in the future. At the time, I also didn't know if the call may be a fishing expedition to trap me into something they could construe as "bad faith". Greed in this industry has backfired on many domain investors. How's that old song go?..."You gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em." :music:

(...And by the way, I was charged I think a $25+ fee by godaddy for locking the domain for the UDRP dispute filing which was somewhat of a surprise.)

 

[Mark]

Thanks for the Info ~ Hoping it was enough to cover your time and effort ....

 

[RJ]

Congrats on the successful settlement. I'm sure going through the UDRP would have made for an interesting case. I'm really surprised how many cases go without a response, usually leading to an easy victory by the complaintant.

I went through the UDRP before on a case many people would have considered a slam dunk for the complainant. However with proper research and refuting the complaint on every point, I was able to win the case and keep the domain. It sounds like you may have had a similar experience should it gone that far.

Well done for not rolling over and giving up.

 

[Dwayne]

whoa, at least you got some money out of it

 

[WebForging]

Thank you for the info.

Thanks. Well done posting on the circumstances (longest post I've run into thus far) and good responses.

Regards,
Keith

 

[jeter4982]

Thanks for sharing your story. Just goes to show that you can get some $$$ out of those cases.

 

[Dave_Z]

(...And by the way, I was charged I think a $25+ fee by godaddy for locking the domain for the UDRP dispute filing which was somewhat of a surprise.)

When did this happen? Was this even part of Go Daddy's Service Agreement?

Did they even email you about this? If not, how'd you find out specifically?

Even NetSol doesn't charge for something like this...so far.

BTW, congrats on the outcome, too. A great way to start the new year.

 

[AdoptableDomains]

When did this happen? Was this even part of Go Daddy's Service Agreement?

Did they even email you about this? If not, how'd you find out specifically?

Even NetSol doesn't charge for something like this...so far.

BTW, congrats on the outcome, too. A great way to start the new year.

Here is the email they sent:

We recently received an inquiry related to your domain name, ***.us. The specific inquiry related to your domain name can be described as follows:

NAF dispute

In accordance with our registration agreeement, https://www.godaddy.com/gdshop/lega...ion_GD.asp?prog_id=GoDaddy&isc=&se=&from_app=, we have charged your credit card in the amount of $29.00 for our processing of this inquiry.

Please also take this opportunity to review the status of your domain names and other accounts. Simply log in at:
https://www.godaddy.com/gdshop/shopper_lookup.asp?prog_id=GoDaddy&isc=gdbb135

If you have any questions concerning the above, please contact our customer service center.

Thank you for your continued business,
GoDaddy.com

Specifically, it's not exactly spelled out the amount, but I would suspect this is where they justify it:

Go Daddy reserves the right to charge a reasonable service fee for administrative tasks outside the scope of its regular services. These include, but are not limited to, customer service issues that cannot be handled over email but require personal service, and disputes that require legal services. These charges will be billed to the Payment Method we have on file for You.

"Reasonable" is in the eye of the beholder. That passage really leaves things open ended. I generally avoid Godaddy because of hidden charges and all the blatant in-your-face ads on their interface.

 

[Acroplex]

Don't use GD. Just take my word for it.

 

[Dave_Z]

Here is the email they sent:



Specifically, it's not exactly spelled out the amount, but I would suspect this is where they justify it:


"Reasonable" is in the eye of the beholder. That passage really leaves things open ended. I generally avoid Godaddy because of hidden charges and all the blatant in-your-face ads on their interface.

And that, I guess, is one other way they make money to make up for the low
registration prices.

 

[seeker]

that was an excellent read.
I'll agree with radistar though.
GD has a history of immidiately rolling over and stopping all activity on a domain while other registrars (enom for example) will not move until a decision is made.

 

[Dave_Z]

Mark/AdoptableDomains, some time after I posted this development in another
forum, Nick Fuller from GD replied saying they'll actually refund the money if
the UDRP complaint is denied.

Have you gotten your money back or has GD notified you of this yet? PM me
if you want the link to the thread since I can't post it here.

 

[AdoptableDomains]

Mark/AdoptableDomains, some time after I posted this development in another
forum, Nick Fuller from GD replied saying they'll actually refund the money if
the UDRP complaint is denied.

Have you gotten your money back or has GD notified you of this yet? PM me
if you want the link to the thread since I can't post it here.

No refund. I would be interested in that info though. The complaint wasn't denied though, but rather withdrawn by the complainant before heard.

Mark