question Site Take Down Request

[MKS Vent]

I received an email from iZOOlogic requesting site take down for infringement. The site in question is only an Efty landing page. Anyone else run into this?
Domain is deutschebitcoinbank
Thanks,

 

[Kate]

The domain is crap anyway.
If you ignore the fact that it's too long and does not roll of the tongue well, there is only one 'obvious' end user, and that is usually the telltale sign of a TM issue.
It's not worth fighting over this domain, because it was not worth buying in the first place.

 

[Ategy]

I would say that you are fine ..

Deutsche is not at all a made up word .. it means "German" in German
Bank is also Bank in German
ADDED: If Bitcoin is also Bitcoin in German (which I suspect) then the 3 facts combined really help your case in that it makes the domain a generic keyword domain (in German).

ADDED: If it wasn't the case, and languages were mixed than I'd say it was more of a brandable .. which in this specific case, ironically, I don't think would have been as good for you (although not necessarily enough to change a final opinion)

With a ultra generic name like "German Bank" they have to live with other people using legitimate similar names. German Bitcoin Bank is a keyword domain and I would think most would say that it looks suspicious .. but if it's a German Bitcoin Bank .. then there is complete legitimate use of the term.

All that being said .. you need to be extremely careful .. make sure you don't have ads running on the site that could be confused with their bank.

Clearing you even more would be if they aren't doing anything with Bitcoin .. or if you registered/bought the domain before they started doing something with Bitcoin.

Another important point is that Bitcoin itself isn't owned by anyone (the guy who made it disappeared) .. so I'm not even sure to what extent other trademarks can be based on and/or contain the word "Bitcoin"?

Definitely get some legal advice .. if it was me (remember .. I am NOT a lawyer .. lol) .. I'd write them back and state in a round about way that the clear interpretation of this domain is not related to what they are doing and that it is clearly a generic set of words unrelated to them .. and ask them for the specific legal and technical reasons they think they have right to the domain.

A lot would hinge on the specific wording of what they sent you. You might be able to get better advice if you posted the original email (take out all names .. and take out the URL itself or space it out so that google does not find this discussion).

ADDED: Obviously at the end of the day .. a final judgement depends on a judge .. and even if you are in the right .. a decision could be made against you .. or the other way around as well.

 

[bmugford]

You have to pick your battles. Going up against a giant company, for essentially a worthless domain, doesn't make that much sense.

Brad

 

[ecalc]

I really don't think they have a valid claim here.

In light of ADR decisions against morganstanleybitcoin.com, tdbankbitcoin.com and capitalonebitcoin.com by 3 different panels I like DB's chances here.

 

[creataweb]

Not worth the fight I'd just drop it or hand it over.

 

[wwwweb]

That is a very large player, and that is a blatant TM violation.

 

[Ategy]

If it were DeutscheBankBitcoin I would 100% agree with you .. or possibly if it wasn't an actually Country name I might have said there was bad faith involved (like MorganBitcoinStanley to me would be a red flag for bad faith) .. but in this case it is a country name being used .. as such the paramaters under which DB "should" be allowed to make claims is much narrower.

In the end there is potential danger if a judge incorrectly sees "Bank" and "BitcoinBank" as being the same thing. I see this claim being just as valid as "German Bank" filing a TM lawsuit against "GermanFoodBank.com".

Trademark laws can be fairly finicky from my personal understanding. Trademarks are not as broad as most think .. the trademark here is "Deusche Bank" in it's entirety ... the bank in no way can lay claims to anything else just because it includes either word on their own. In this case the domain does indeed contain both words .. but not together .. and in this specific case .. the words are used as their separate unique meanings .. not the collective meaning of "Deusche Bank".

I actually have issues with trademarks like "Deusche Bank" depending on the structure of the language. I can't be 100% because I don't speak German .. but let's say it was the same as English for "German Bank" .. then allowing a TM on "German Bank" might or might not hinder the ability of another bank to claim they were "The first German Bank" .. regardless as to if they were actually the first bank in Germany or not.

I personally also don't like Geo Trademarks because they can lead to confusion with actual government services and mislead people. Like TaxCanada could be interpreted as being Revenue Canada (government's tax department) .. but that's another matter for another discussion on another day .. lol.


Anyhow .. at the end of the day there certainly is some risk here depending on the lingual interpretation of who is judging the case .. and quite frankly the actual domain just might not be even worth the time and energy to defend as I don't really see anyone actually buying the domain for any significant amount.


Also .. remember that all my comments are limited to my assumption the lingual context of this domain is similar to what the English equivalent is. "German Bitcoin Bank" is natural English .. if "Deusche Bitcoin Bank" isn't natural language flow in German then it no longer has the relative safety of being a generic.

Deutsche is not at all a made up word .. it means "German" in German
Bank is also Bank in German
ADDED: If Bitcoin is also Bitcoin in German (which I suspect) then the 3 facts combined really help your case in that it makes the domain a generic keyword domain (in German).

ADDED: If it wasn't the case, and languages were mixed than I'd say it was more of a brandable .. which in this specific case, ironically, I don't think would have been as good for you (although not necessarily enough to change a final opinion)

With a ultra generic name like "German Bank" they have to live with other people using legitimate similar names. German Bitcoin Bank is a keyword domain and I would think most would say that it looks suspicious .. but if it's a German Bitcoin Bank .. then there is complete legitimate use of the term.

....

 

[Silentptnr]

I'm sure it would be okay for you to post the content of the email. You might get more advice if we could see the words used in the email.

I have received emails from both Google TM Team, and National Assoc Of Realtors.

Funny enough, Google TM Team warned me to change a logo on a website. Someone apparently complained to them that my logo was confusingly similar in color and font.

National Assoc Of Realtors asked me to cancel a domain containing the tm word Realt*r.

I complied in both cases.

By the way, I hand registered Deut/sche/Token/com. All other Deutsche + KW (coin, blockchain, etc) are taken. I think your challenge might be having "bank" in there with "Deutsche".

Remember, people/companies can bring whatever action they want. They could have sent the same email for a domain they just felt like pursuing.

Like others have said, the law itself can be used as a weapon on those who have less money to fight with. Not a matter of right or wrong, just economics.

 

[wwwweb]

if i own the domain, i would keep renewing and keep very low waiting for db(dot)com launching their bitcoin related services and BOOOMMM it will struck gold :D

Very big investment bank, that is a udrp in the works.

You do realize they can hold you liable for $100k, do you own your own home?

 

[Ategy]

It's ok your a legal expert, I will take your free namepros advice, take the time to read the case before offering your 2 cents of legal advice. I see a lot of words, but not many of them make sense. This is not scrabble, it is clear what the OP is attempting to do, if you want to encourage it by all means. It might be a different case when dealing with $5 closeout domains, but this is a clear violation, against one of the biggest banks in the World, only stupid people continue to encourage the registration of this infringing domain.

1) Again .. how about you yourself take the time to READ what I wrote TWICE .. I 100% agree with that case being a very clear trademark infringement. Stop wrongly implying that I disagree with the results of that case.

2) I also VERY clearly stated somewhere above that I am not a lawyer and that before taking ANYONE's advice here (including both mine and yours .. or anyone else's) one should get actual legal advice from an actual trademark professional.

3) I don't see how the purchase price is relevant in any ways whether a domain was bought for $100k, for $100 or $5 does not protect it from legal decisions. The price could be a factor for which the owner chooses whether or not it's worth defending .. but I'm pretty sure the acquisition price will have zero significance on the legal outcome of any TM case.

4) I did not see a single case of anybody actually encouraging the registration of this domain .. if anything .. most who said they felt it was not a trademark issue also said it still wasn't worth registering and/or defending. Additionally I specifically also said that while I personally did not think this domain was infringing on the trademark .. that I thought a judge who did not see the linguistic contexts the same way I do, COULD interpret it that it is infringing.


Finally .. before rushing to make rude insults and personal attacks .. remember that this is a DISCUSSION forum for people to share their thoughts and ideas. Even if you think somebody is wrong does not make it appropriate to launch a personal attack on them. This is an open forum .. and people are allowed to share their opinions ... significantly more so if they actually take the time to go into details and give thorough reasons as to how/why they came to that point-of-view.

This thread was started simply from a member asking if anyone had received a similar email. From there the conversation drifted into a few directions .. for some of us it's an opportunity to explore the limits of what is or isn't covered by trademarks (not even specifically limited to this particular one since the whole point of the thread was asking about other domains) .. and not necessarily an active discussion as to whether people should or should not register domains that come close to the line of trademark infringement (it can be that for you if you want .. but just realise that you do not have exclusive rights to dictate what can or can't be discussed/explored in an open ended discussion .. and you should not be rude to people for that or any other reason).

I personally would not have registered this domain .. and I wouldn't encourage anyone to do so. But to me .. that is not what this actual discussion is about.

 

[Chris Wright]

I have not had this problem (yet).
It appears that a brand / trademark protector has noticed the words "deutsche" and "bank" within your domain.
It doesn't cost them much to fire off an email. And it justifies their client fees.
But does "German Bitcoin Bank" infringe on their client's trademarks?
You'd need to ask a lawyer about that.
My amateur opinion is no, it does not.
They might be hoping to get your domain for free.
IANAL - ask a lawyer.

 

[wwwweb]

I have not had this problem (yet).
It appears that a brand / trademark protector has noticed the words "deutsche" and "bank" within your domain.
It doesn't cost them much to fire off an email. And it justifies their client fees.
But does "German Bitcoin Bank" infringe on their client's trademarks?
You'd need to ask a lawyer about that.
My amateur opinion is no, it does not.
They might be hoping to get your domain for free.
IANAL - ask a lawyer.

Great advice here lol

Deutsche Bank AG is a German investment bank and financial services company, with its headquarters in the Deutsche Bank Twin Towers in Frankfurt. It has more than 100,000 employees

 

[Chris Wright]

...waiting for db(dot)com launching their bitcoin related services and BOOOMMM it will struck gold :D

This is exactly the strategy that could lose the domain in a UDRP. (Bad Faith)

...Deutsche Bank AG is a German investment...

Thanks Captain Obvious!!!

...you shouldn't hold or buy any obvious TM names or trade marked names within a name

By your logic, I cannot own AppleFarmJuices.com.

...German Bitcoin Bank is a keyword domain...
...I'd write them back...
...even if you are in the right .. a decision could be made against you...

It is actually a generic keyword domain.
I wouldn't write them. That's just stirring the s**t pot.
Many people who are in the right lose anyway. Look at the Nissan.com story.

 

[Smiles76]

I received an email from iZOOlogic requesting site take down for infringement. The site in question is only an Efty landing page. Anyone else run into this?
Domain is deutschebitcoinbank
Thanks,

Drop that domain name and move on. You will never win this battle. Especially, not against a bank with a team of lawyers and unlimited resources. They probably have an entire department dedicated to going after TM violators.

 

[ecalc]

This post was in no way for "legal advice" it was simply to determine if anyone else experienced an issue like this.

Yes others have experienced issues like this and public records show Deutsche Bank batting 1.000 when they escalate take down requests to WIPO complaints. WIPO case D2012-2028 is an example. Good luck!

 

[BrandMart]

Is $5-$10 domain worth all the fuss? Drop it and hit the pub

 

[DNWon]

What Kate said above and:

The OP already basically admitted he regged it in bad faith,

GermanBitcoinBank.com is available for registration.

It's quite obvious what the OP was trying to do.

Why so many domainers are on the fence on this name is quite sad!

The name sucks and it was registered in bad faith! End of Story!

P.S. DeutscheBank is a fierce protector of their trademarks too! It's foolish to hold on to this domain and it's even more foolish for domainers to encourage them to do so! They were given fair warning!

 

[wwwweb]

Germany's biggest bank said an "operational error" led to the accidental collateral payment to an exchange it does business with.

The size of the mistake? $35 billion, a person familiar with the matter told CNNMoney. That's $5 billion more than Deutsche Bank's entire market value.

"The error was identified within a matter of minutes, and then rectified," a Deutsche Bank spokesman said in a statement.


Deutsche Bank said it was moving the money as collateral to its account at Eurex, a major international exchange focused on European derivatives. Investors are sometimes required to post more collateral as security for repayment. The incident occurred in late March, the person familiar with the matter said.

It's not clear how much money Deutsche Bank intended to pay -- just that it wasn't nearly $35 billion. Deutsche Bank declined to comment further.

 

[MKS Vent]

Thanks for the replies.
The only triggering factor is the landing page, no infringement for owning the domain name.
IMEZI, that's the plan with this one and a few others i have.
Plan for now is to remove the landing page.

 

[urlurl]

landing page or not, you shouldn't hold or buy any obvious TM names or trade marked names within a name

 

[Rich]

I received an email from iZOOlogic requesting site take down for infringement. The site in question is only an Efty landing page. Anyone else run into this?
Domain is deutschebitcoinbank
Thanks,

Not yet *knocks on wood*
I would probably delete the domain if they didn't want to take it over. Not worth the problems they can bring you.

 

[MKS Vent]

wwwweb, Chris Wright and others. We are all here for one thing and that's to help one another. This post was in no way for "legal advice" it was simply to determine if anyone else experienced an issue like this. We all have different levels of domain knowledge and everyone's input is welcome. I understand non of us are legal experts and any information given should be from experience.
Thanks again for all the input.

 

[Ategy]

Yes others have experienced issues like this and public records show Deutsche Bank batting 1.000 when they escalate take down requests to WIPO complaints. WIPO case D2012-2028 is an example. Good luck!

Just took a peek at your link .. That case involves "deutschebankindia.com" .. which I would see as a clear trademark violation because it implies "Deusche Bank" in "India". I actually agree with that decision.

Just because they.ve won 100% of their cases that went to a panel does not mean that they are right about this case .. in fact .. they have likely been wrong before but the "defendant" just gave up or didn't contest (as in this case). I really don't think they have a valid claim here.

 

[Ategy]

@wwwweb .. before you start making false claims of people "talking out of their asses" .. lol .. maybe you yourself should bother to read what I wrote first as I specifically said I do completely AGREE with that decision (WIPO case D2012-2028) .. but just that I also felt there were enough contextual and linguistic differences so as to that specific decision (and the reasons behind it) is not relevant to this specific domain (just the domain without content).

I NEVER said I did not think this domain was or was not registered in good faith .. simply that I don't think it's provable that it was 100% because I don't think the actual trademark covers this particular set of words in the particular order they are placed in and the fact they are a sum of generics coming together to create a domain with specific meaning that could differ in scope to the services DB provides .. combined with the fact the word "Deutsche" alone is in no way trademarkable .. and that in this specific instance .. "Deutsche" and "Bank" are not just separated by another word .. but much more importantly .. each word is used legitimately and specifically as individual generic words for their actual (German) dictionary meaning.

 

[cooljub]

IMEZI, that's the plan with this one and a few others i have.

I think you just shot yourself in the foot there.