Some interesting TM "Cybersquatting" Info?

[Sam]

With all the the hype of being "sued" for trademark infringement, I decided to look at the good old WIPO database:

Some interesting finds (all datat is for the ENTIRE HISTORY OF WIPO (eg. 2000+):

.NL - 10 Total Cases won by complainant.
There are currently : 2,300,000+ .NL domains.

Assume 15% of .NL's are TM infregement (must be higher, dunno, will go with conservative estimate):

Chances of .NL taken away via WIPO: 0.00025%.

That doesnt even include "sueing for damage".

Lets look at ccTLDs:

For 2006 there was a grand total of : 1660 complaints to WIPO. I am too lazy to sort out the data, but lets assume 50% of the time the complainant wins.

That = 800 domains.

There is a grand total of 94,000,000 gtlds registered! Assuming that only 15% are tm infringement (probably more): 14,100,000.

The chances during 2006 that your TM infringement domain was taken away was: 0.000571%.

The chances of "sueing for damages" probably at least 1/2 - 1/3 that (conservative estimate, probably much less).

So, what exactly do you have to lose with TM "typos"??! The chances of you getting sued is less then some lotteries :lol: .

So next time, when you see a tm related domain don't automatically appraise it at $0.00 due to "your going to get sued". See Domain appraisals.

I rest my case. Lets see what the critics will throw at me this time.

Edit: Just noticed both wipo.it and wipo.in are both parked :yell: :yell:

 

[GreenGambler]

Sounds like a well thought-out theory.

What about .coms? What made you look at .nl?

I usually don't buy a trademarked name because I feel like it is kind of wrong and I would'nt want anyone to buy a name that I had trademaked.

I don't see it as being a tottaly bad thing, just something that I try not to do.

And if I do own any TM'd names, which is possible with as many generic 5L.coms as I own. Well, I'm not too worried about getting sued.

 

[Sam]

Hi there,

.Com is included in the Gtlds (obviously). Wipo doesn't sort by TLDs for gTLDS so i just grouped them all together. I used .NL since its own of the more popular ccTLDs used in Europe.

Cheers,
Sam

 

[kev]

i got a name taken off me (not through WIPO) when Microsofts lawyers got in touch with me so id assume many names were taken via this way aswell lol

 

[Alex]

I agree with you Sam to one extent, as I also thought the same way about TM's.
but I also appraise most TM names at regfee or $0, because people reg worthless TM's that will not get type in traffic, nor interest from the TM holder (like typo .info domains).

Also it is unprofessional to list your obvious TM's in the appraisal section, especially those related to the Olympic games, walt disney, paypal etc. Their value relies much in the traffic they get.

I am not blunt to say many TM's are worthless. They are worth quite a lot if used with brain. But putting them for appraisal does not help the domain owner in a possible future case, as it shows they registered it in bad faith.

Alex

 

[Peter]

Kev has hit the nail on the head.

Your stats only take into consideration the amount of domains that go through a WIPO. There are a lot more that do not go that far. Also even if you hand over a domain without going through a WIPO you can still be sued.

 

[Dotmainer]

read last week some cases UDRP/Wipo

it looks really bad if you are known there and complainant list your previous cases as you are known for cybersquatting.
So if you are in right with some domain,
but you have bad history, you risk to loose it.

 

[Sam]

Kev has hit the nail on the head.

Your stats only take into consideration the amount of domains that go through a WIPO. There are a lot more that do not go that far. Also even if you hand over a domain without going through a WIPO you can still be sued.

Still, you must admit, the chances of you getting sued is quite low, very low. Yes, your domain can be taken away, at what cost? $8.88 (reg fee??! :yell: ).

Besides a few "high profile" cases, wasn't a guy putting children site typos with adult parking pages? (very smart), I haven't heard many people being sued for money.

Now with ccTLD typos, thats even rarer. Imagine the pain to try and sue someone in another country :hehe:

 

[Peter]

Still, you must admit, the chances of you getting sued is quite low, very low. Yes, your domain can be taken away, at what cost? $8.88 (reg fee??! :yell: ).

Besides a few "high profile" cases, wasn't a guy putting children site typos with adult parking pages? (very smart), I haven't heard many people being sued for money.

Now with ccTLD typos, thats even rarer. Imagine the pain to try and sue someone in another country :hehe:

Yes the chances are somewhat minimal but that does not exactly make cybersquatting the right thing to do. If you play with fire you will eventually be burned, you will take on the wrong company and it will bite you.

For a company to sue an individual in a different country is harder but certainly not impossible. Also if you lose a WIPO for cybersquatting then you will be branded as a cyber squatter and those judgments can be submitted as part of evidence in any future case.

 

[Sam]

Yes the chances are somewhat minimal but that does not exactly make cybersquatting the right thing to do. If you play with fire you will eventually be burned, you will take on the wrong company and it will bite you.

For a company to sue an individual in a different country is harder but certainly not impossible. Also if you lose a WIPO for cybersquatting then you will be branded as a cyber squatter and those judgments can be submitted as part of evidence in any future case.

. I guess a smart "cybersquatter" would research all the companies who have tried pursuing legal action for typos and avoid like the plaque.

Again its benefits vs risk. People are making KILLINGS of typos right now , high high ROI with minimal risk. Pure economics.

 

[Kenny]

. I guess a smart "cybersquatter" would research all the companies who have tried pursuing legal action for typos and avoid like the plaque.

Again its benefits vs risk. People are making KILLINGS of typos right now , high high ROI with minimal risk. Pure economics.

"Smart Cybersquatter"? Sam, is it always about the money? What about the future of the industry?

The "hit and run" attitude is what has disgraced us in the eyes of the general public and could focus the Gov into thinking we need MORE restrictions injected into our business practices.

It has got to be about the "long run" if we are to sustain as an industry, and unless we clean our house you can bet we will be regulated, and soon.

I am more than surprised and a little disappointed at your stand on this. You have earned good money reg'n generic niche names and to think this is the only option left available to you to earn further, well I don't believe it.

Nothing personal Sam, you know I like you and have always admired your diligence. I just think you are on the wrong track on this one.

Peace,
Cy

 

[Ronald Regging]

Besides a few "high profile" cases, wasn't a guy putting children site typos with adult parking pages? (very smart), I haven't heard many people being sued for money.

Yeah and that guy went to prison... Thats not smart, its sick and disturbing.. But I think kev is on track. Sure you might not get sued, but one way or another, you might lose your domain.

 

[Sam]

Yeah and that guy went to prison... Thats not smart, its sick and disturbing.. But I think kev is on track. Sure you might not get sued, but one way or another, you might lose your domain.

It was sarcasm , very "smart" for any guy to put porn ads on a children domain typo. :hehe:

In terms of good for the industry.... well yes, domain names are all about money. Why we wouldn't be here, if it wasn't about the money.

Squatting has been here since the 90's. I still see the domain industry going strong. TM typos will have at most a "negligible" nuisance, on the casual internet surfer. They will curse and what not, but surely paring TM squatting with the "doom" of the industry best illustrates what the media have always wanted to hype it into.

I doubt any surfer's life is going to end when waltzing into a parking page :yell: . Unless its domain sponsor's annoying 4 pop up ads.

Its been here, and will stay here. I am just saying, this whole thing is overblown, way out of proportions.

And since when did squatting be bad.... look at my sig links. Two are to TM related names. However, Sedo probably will never take the name away, probably liking me bringing new customers to them. Linkin Park probably likes my mini fan site (which i never bothered to update), which may give them even more new fans.

 

[Mark]

The things Kids say now a days ....

 

[IAmAllanShore]

If you poke a bear enough times it will think you enough of a nuisance to finally do something about it.

It's already been touched on, but you're completely ignoring that:
1) Most "takings" are not by WIPO or by Lanham/ACPA, but instead by C&D as most domain owners aren't dumb enough to go toe-to-toe over LookAtMyNokiasHere.com
2) Most TM domains are trash; keyword squatting that damages little because of just how bad the names are. However, if you did stumble across a good domain name that is TM infringing, you will be hearing from their lawyers or "TM Enforcement Team".
3) Not to reuse the bear, so perhaps "sleeping giant" or "elephant in the room" might be more accurate.
4) you have completely ignored the difference between domains like nissan.com that have content (Yet could be viewed as "infringing" none-the-less), and parked domains that serve ads in direct competition to the TM holder, and parked domains that only benefit the TM holder so they might turn a blind eye to them at the moment.

Touting just how brazen you are/we should be does nothing but raise red flags for the "outside world" to throw stones at.

-Allan

 

[Keynes]

So, what exactly do you have to lose with TM "typos"??! The chances of you getting sued is less then some lotteries :lol: .

And guess what? Law firms know this, and this is a great litigation opportunity for them - don't think they're blind to this. Never underestimate risk when making a rational decision.