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,

 

[Chris Wright]

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

These cases are informative, but don't have the plot twist of the DB case.

Morgan Stanley Bank ~ Arbitrary Mark.
TD Bank ~ Arbitrary Mark.
Capital One ~ Suggestive Mark.

None of these could be considered a Generic Term.

"Deutsche Bank" is a generic term ("German Bank"), that has become established as a trademark.

This was likely accomplished by their commercial usage of the term (1870) before the existence of German trademarking (1894).

If it were founded in 1970, it would probably never be considered for trademark.

It would be very hard to find case history that parallels this situation.

Anyway, I agree with Ategy. This name is probably not worth whatever risk it carries.

 

[wwwweb]

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!

Thanks for sharing this, most of the people commenting here against it are talking out of their ass, and did not even bother to read the findings made by the panel which shows a strong response to DB’s rights, very hard to argue, or establish anything against it. It was a slam dunk case.

Type in DB.com, and see where it takes you.

You can’t really tell these bottom feeders anything different, as they try to profit a few bucks off the established marks of Fortune 500 companies, giving all domainers a bad name.

 

[DNWon]

As Bruno Mars likes to say:

This domain name DeutscheBitcoinBank is UDRPing in Finesse!

 

[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.

 

[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

 

[wwwweb]

@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.

It's ok your a legal expert, 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.

One of the biggest concerns for these banks is email spoofing, that is why they try to control these domains, they can't register them all, but they can take action once registered.

It shows bad intent, and people who encourage it are pretty much bottom feeders who can't create a worthwhile portfolio of their own, and have to tread on the marks of established companies to try, and attempt a pitty sale.

 

[creataweb]

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

 

[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]

Disclaimer: This post is for the presentation of information ONLY. This post is NOT advice, legal or otherwise.

In the case linked below, the complainant's entire trademark is contained within the respondent's domain (EddieBauerCamping·com).

https://dnattorney.com/dn-resources/eddie-bauer-v-coles-sales-solutions/

Surprising quotes from the ruling:

"Registration alone does not necessarily constitute an act of infringement..."

"A trademark does not give the mark owner an unlimited exclusive right to use the name. There are many uses available to other parties, including non-commercial and non-competing uses."

"Since Complainant's mark does not appear to extend to that class of services, this use does not appear to be fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of Complainant's mark."

Again this is information, NOT advice.
People PLEASE do not play the fool's game and use this information as a license to infringe trademarks!

 

[Ategy]

Disclaimer: This post is for the presentation of information ONLY. This post is NOT advice, legal or otherwise.

In the case linked below, the complainant's entire trademark is contained within the respondent's domain (EddieBauerCamping·com).

https://dnattorney.com/dn-resources/eddie-bauer-v-coles-sales-solutions/

Surprising quotes from the ruling:

"Registration alone does not necessarily constitute an act of infringement..."

"A trademark does not give the mark owner an unlimited exclusive right to use the name. There are many uses available to other parties, including non-commercial and non-competing uses."

"Since Complainant's mark does not appear to extend to that class of services, this use does not appear to be fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of Complainant's mark."

Again this is information, NOT advice.
People PLEASE do not play the fool's game and use this information as a license to infringe trademarks!

Without taking too much time looking into it .. legally or not .. on ethical grounds .. I personally don't like people using other people's full names with the exception of very limited and specific (mainly with historical / dead people .. and some contexts of political commentary/opinions). This domain is VERY different from the DB case in context. In fact .. the specific reason is because the context of the Deutsche bitcoin domain separates Deutsche Bank into two separate words with uniquely and separate justifiable usage.

EddieBauerCamping does not even separate Eddie and Bauer (not that even doing that alone would make this domain ethical IMO) .. and much MUCH more importantly .. neither name actually is a generic dictionary word.

From a legal point of view you can use full names as a trademark as long as it is unrelated to what someone with that name is doing .. but I'm not a big fan of that fact. There was a discussion on this somewhere in the forum a few months ago ...

 

[Chris Wright]

@Ategy Eddie Bauer is a brand of outdoor gear.
Cosmetically, the case I posted is totally unrelated.
But the crux of the OP's problem is definitely illuminated by the case.
Did you read it?

Also, I'm only investigating the legality of things.
Not saying anything is ethical or unethical.
Those things are up to the individual to wrestle with.

 

[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.

 

[karmaco]

While he put it rather crudely I do agree with most of @wwwweb comments.

It is without a doubt bottom dweller behavior to acquire domains with well known trademark holders. It is also quite stupid to argue legalities as you would 100 percent have your butt handed to you after basically admitting you bought to profit off the well known name at a later date in this very thread.

People work hard to acquire valuable names and stuff like this makes domainers look bad. So the rage of @wwwweb is understandable. This kind of domaining where someone thinks they can bend the rules to some imagined payday make us all look bad.

Drop the name not just the landing page.

 

[branding]

Like others have stated, "Deutsche" is a very generic term in German. I don't think it's obvious trademark infringement but I can see DB's point of view.

Even if you are entitled to own this domain the question you have to ask yourself is this: Is it worth the hassle? Battles like this are hard and time consuming. They have a big team of lawyers with more than sufficiant funds to take you on. What do you have?

 

[BrandMart]

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

 

[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.

 

[eurorealtor]

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,

They can smash you like a bug on the windshield and they probably will, since they bothered to contact you already. Lucky you, they gave you a chance to save your butt. Good luck, whatever you'll decide to do.

 

[MKS Vent]

After reading through the various comments there are a few takeaways from this.
We are all domaining for one reason and that's to profit. Don't feed me a line that your not.
For those that are offended by "bottom feeders looking for a payday" that's on you. I'm sure you have a few domains that are head scratchers as well.
This domain is in no way trying to mimic any company.
Simply put an algorithm flagged this domain for both keywords Deutsche and bank within the name. There is no such entity as Deutsche Bitcoin Bank. I've reached out to iZOOlogic in hopes to learn more about this.
Thanks,

 

[wwwweb]

WRONG, not off the marks of established companies.

Clearly you are not profitable, if you are going down such dark roads, and looking for justification from a forum. You registered this 4 days ago, you joined this forum yesterday, clearly you are clueless.

The fact you have responded will now give them fuel to show your intent is live, and active, they will either give you a threat of the actions they are willing to take to protect their brand, and most likely you will fold like a cheap suit, even though you will deny it, fast forward a few months, this one will be with DB.

 

[MKS Vent]

Because i joined a forum 4 days ago to ask a simple question i'm considered clueless? That's ignorant logic. What was your purpose for joining the forum? For the record i'm not seeking justification from a forum.
Regards,

 

[Silentptnr]

Based on the thread title, they have only asked that you take down the site. So do that only.

 

[tldboss]

Suggest you drop the name, there are so many names you can acquire

 

[Galaxy Traveller]

Based on the thread title, they have only asked that you take down the site. So do that only.

This is the best solution because I also dont think this domain is worth to keep. Though this time I think the bank is showing muscle power as the word is generic. Someday in future a Germanloan company will bully Germanhomeloan to shut down.

 

[ecalc]

We are all domaining for one reason and that's to profit. Don't feed me a line that your not.
For those that are offended by "bottom feeders looking for a payday" that's on you. I'm sure you have a few domains that are head scratchers as well.

Good spin, reminds me of an old customer service form letter ...

In accordance with company policy we are pleased to announce that you received merchandise produced to the same high standards afforded all our customers and we feel that you are extremely chicken sh*t in returning it, particularly since we did not authorize the return in the first place. You know damned well we have a fair and comprehensive “Returned Goods Policy” and you will pay hell receiving credit unless this policy is strictly adhered to. We ship whatever comes off the production line regardless if it meets your specifications or not, that’s besides the point. Why don't you get on your engineer's a** for a change? We are reasonably sure that our packaging contains the proper materials a good share of the time, which is exactly what you ordered. By god no one is perfect. I’d like to see your production area some time. I’ll bet you have a sh*t pot full of problems too.

 

[MapleDots]

Bitcoinbank is different from Bank

I could run a DeutsceDairyBank and they could not ask for my domain either.

Bitcoin was never part of the original Banking Terminology so I don't thing Deutsche Bank can lay claim to it. The argument they do have is that it is a financial domain and again I think it's a stretch.