information ShortDot's James.bond and 007.bond Domain Names Are for Sale at Dan.com

[NickB]

"ShortDot SA, the domain registry that owns and operates the .bond domain extension, has contracted with Dan.com to facilitate the sale of James.bond and 007.bond domain names."

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-...ond-Domain-Names-Are-for-Sale-at-Dan-com.html

OK - this just made me shake my head, they do a press release to say they are selling these domains which blatantly only have 1 end user in mind - asking for trouble?

Coincidently the new James Bond film is being released today in the UK

 

[NickB]

That one, they already owned the DN and their brand name literally includes the extension. I think the difference is, with the Bond film franchise, their brand isn't based on an internet extension.

It would be a smart buy for them.

I think it's more to do with the public's perception of the name spanning (and including) the dot - They could quite easily argue that it is confusingly similar and that the public's perception would be these domains are to do with the Franchise?

 

[Mr. Deleted]

That thread reminds me, we should always always remember and go to the Nissan saga: A generic domain name does not equate automatic ownership to a corp just because they have a big brand on it.

**edit there is naivety in that logic, I get it. Most of us don't have the resources for that kind of pending war, no matter the intention for the DN. Todays reality, unfortunately.

well... Nissan actually had a legitimate interest in his last name... If your name is James and you want the name in .Bond, that might help you out...

 

[HotKey]

well... Nissan actually had a legitimate interest in his last name... If your name is James and you want the name in .Bond, that might help you out...

Yep, exactly. There could be several legitimate uses for the domain, like a financial firm specializing in bonds. And their name is James:

https://www.raymondjames.com/wealth...investment-solutions/fixed-income/bond-basics

I mean some might see it as a stretch, but this is a working example and if said financial firm chose to buy the DN and use it, not infringing on anything.

 

[Future Sensors]

Who owns the .bond registry and what other registries do they own?

https://shortdot.bond/
https://icannwiki.org/.bond
https://shortdot.bond/domain-extensions/
https://dns.coffee/nameservers/VERIFICATION-4D79C7C5.NS3.DAN.HOSTING

 

[Future Sensors]

Nice pick up - I noticed this and was going to put in the original post - if the domain/s sold their "contract" (loosely used) is with DAN to make sure the domain gets transferred and they get paid..... same for all who use them.....

The wording implies something else but I think this is what they meant, no need for it to be mentioned at all really, they are just trying to add a layer of authenticity to the press release - which is another fail.....

Right. Maybe it's this contract?

https://dan.com/terms_of_use
section 5.4

 

[jberryhill]

What kind of contract is this exactly?

My guess would be that they simply posted the names for sale under the ordinary user agreement and they probably didn't ask for permission to use Dan.com's name in the header of their press release.

But they do convey the impression that this is through some special arrangement with Dan.com.

 

[branding]

DANJAQ LLC will end up owning the registry if they hear about this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danjaq

Danjaq, LLC (formerly Danjaq S.A. and Danjaq, Inc.) is the holding company responsible for the copyright and trademarks to the characters, elements, and other material related to James Bond on screen. It is currently owned and managed by the family of Albert R. Broccoli, the co-initiator of the popular film franchise.
---------------

I mentioned this in the other thread, but I want to make it clear to anyone new here:

If what the registry is doing here is not immediately obvious to you as a really dumb idea, you would do yourself a favor and get out of domaining, because you might end up getting hurt.

The press release is a study in self-delusion. Saying "James" is a common name, or "007" is a three-digit string is pretty irrelevant to the context here.

1. This press release is one week ahead of the premiere of a new James Bond movie. They've had these names for a while (and advertised them as a pair before), but they are expecting a potential finder of fact to somehow believe that the timing of this advertisement is just some kind of coincidence.

2. The press release clearly puts "James.Bond" together with "007.Bond" for no reason other than the association with the movie franchise associated with those terms.

3. The press release attempts to justify "James.Bond" by saying "'James' is one of the most popular first names in the world". That's true. What other "popular first names" are they selling? Jim? No. Paul? No. Muhammad? No. Mary? No. Most "popular first names" in .bond aren't even registered, much less being touted for sale the week before a Bond movie release.

4. The press release notes that "007" is a three digit number. Same questions apply. Why just that one, when they aren't selling or touting any other three digit numbers (or at least not any I checked). 001, 002, 003, etc., all look to be registered by ordinary registrants and parked. They held back "007". Why? What is special about that one?

These are the kinds of contextual facts which, for some reason, a certain kind of mindset seeks to ignore when attempting to justify blatant cybersquatting. I don't know if it is a psychological syndrome of some kind, but the "don't look at the entire factual context, just focus on some narrow fact" mentality is pretty common.

There is nothing other than the association with the James Bond film franchise, that explains why, after having these names for a while, they decided to issue a new press release the week before a Bond movie.

There is nothing other than the association with the James Bond film franchise, that explains why they are advertising these as a pair - and have held them back for themselves while leaving other three-digit numbers and popular names either unregistered or registered in the ordinary course to others.

And, finally, saying "But there might be some guy named 'James Bond'" does nothing to change the fact that neither of these names is registered to a guy named "James Bond". These names are registered to a deeply misguided organization that is not only harming its own reputation, but dragging Dan.com down with it. Coming up with some hypothetical facts from some alternative universe does not change the reality in THIS universe, and it is blatantly and abundantly clear what they are doing here.

Now that's some Pro content. Thanks!

 

[jberryhill]

 

[CraigD]

Of course they can - anything is possible in a UDRP if you have the money to throw around - there are several cases of these in recent complaints. I seem to remember MR.green losing to the Mr Green TM.

https://circleid.com/posts/20171221_another_registrant_loses_udrp_where_trademark_spans_the_dot/

Some panelists also believe in time machines, as domains registered and owned decades before the complainant's TM was a spot on their Daddy's shorts have also freely been given away. Again, $$$$.

My question is the opposite - can a domain owner also use that angle to PROTECT it in a UDRP - a domain hack for example that may coincidentally have the complainant's TM in the SLD, but combined with the TLD, is a totally different word?

Thanks!

From the article:
...The Overview says: “Where the applicable TLD and the second-level portion of the domain name in combination contain the relevant trademark, panels may consider the domain name in its entirety for purposes of assessing confusing similarity.”

 

[HotKey]

Of course they can - anything is possible in a UDRP if you have the money to throw around - there are several cases of these in recent complaints. I seem to remember MR.green losing to the Mr Green TM.

https://circleid.com/posts/20171221_another_registrant_loses_udrp_where_trademark_spans_the_dot/

Some panelists also believe in time machines, as domains registered and owned decades before the complainant's TM was a spot on their Daddy's shorts have also freely been given away. Again, $$$$.

My question is the opposite - can a domain owner also use that angle to PROTECT it in a UDRP - a domain hack for example that may coincidentally have the complainant's TM in the SLD, but combined with the TLD, is a totally different word?

That's a great example, thank you. Was not aware of it.

So the panel only used the "confusingly similarity" portion of the holy three:

1. The trademark is damaged as a result of an identical or confusingly similar domain name
2. The current registrant does not have any relevant interests regarding the domain name
3. The current registrant uses the domain name in "bad faith"

in that decision, I wonder?

 

[NickB]

007 - No Time To Park

Check out the "abject stupidity" thread.

So they have knocked 75k off the asking price......don't think it will do them any favours

 

[NickB]

james .bond

is a

first name .surname

which are much more valuable than

first name surname .com's

because every

first name surname .com

exists

but i only know of

5 surnames recognised in the uk that are available as

first name .surname

new gtlds eg shorter than the .com because the .com isnt necessary

i have been buying

first name .surname

new gtlds for reg fee for years

ive owned 16

first name .surname

new gtlds over the years and still own at least 11

first name .surname

new gtlds

but

james .bond

first name .surname

gtld when sold will sell for big dough and then everyone will want their first name .surname
as their website address lol

wait till

.smith

and

.jones

new gtlds are added etc

eg very very popular surnames in the uk then youll see big prices paid for

first name .surname

new gtlds

all good fun

I do understand, also the way you wrote this post looks like you where trying to write a poem.....

The point is they are blatantly targeting 1 specific end user in the way they are marketing these domains - it's pretty obvious......

You can spin it how you want and I agree with the first . surname but it's not the way they are going about things.......

 

[branding]

I'm particularly intererested in the "contract" with @DAN.COM that ShortDot SA mentions in their PR:

"ShortDot SA, the domain registry that owns and operates the .bond domain extension, has contracted with Dan.com to facilitate the sale of James.bond and 007.bond domain names."​

What kind of contract is this exactly?

Good question!, @DAN.COM . Also, are they still listed @Sedo as they were last time or were they booted for TM infringement.

 

[lock]

I am not a spy but i see advertising.

 

[CraigD]

.

 

[Mr. Deleted]

say my friend, her sons name is James and her you could say she has a bond with her kid...

 

[platey]

james bond

may well be trademarked

but it was a surname in the uk

centuries before any trademark existed and was applied for

the uk has been about for 1000+ years centuries before the film or books

so they have a trademark?

and a recent brand in comparrison?

and? lol

 

[NickB]

james bond

may well be trademarked

but it was a surname in the uk

centuries before any trademark existed and was applied for

the uk has been about for 1000+ years centuries before the film or books

so they have a trademark?

and a recent brand in comparrison?

and? lol

Yeah....their advertising James.Bond & 007.bond together to all those Mr and Mrs Jame's and Bond's out there who are fans of the James Bond Franchise

 

[platey]

james .bond

is a

first name .surname

which are much more valuable than

first name surname .com's

because every

first name surname .com

exists

but i only know of

5 surnames recognised in the uk that are available as

first name .surname

new gtlds eg shorter than the .com because the .com isnt necessary

i have been buying

first name .surname

new gtlds for reg fee for years

ive owned 16

first name .surname

new gtlds over the years and still own at least 11

first name .surname

new gtlds

but

james .bond

first name .surname

gtld when sold will sell for big dough and then everyone will want their first name .surname
as their website address lol

wait till

.smith

and

.jones

new gtlds are added etc

eg very very popular surnames in the uk then youll see big prices paid for

first name .surname

new gtlds

all good fun

 

[Name Trader]

Who owns the .bond registry and what other registries do they own?