news Startup Sues A Domain Name Owner To Grab A 16-Year-Old URL

[osamson]

Now This is an interesting one:

Jason Kneen is a programmer and happens to own about a hundred domain names picked up over a sixteen year period. One of those, workbetter.com, he purchased in 1999 and it has been available on his site for years. In late April 2014 a company, OfficeLinks, approached him about buying the domain for use as a URL for their co-working space.

He refused and now the startup is trying to bully him legally?

FULL STORY: http://techcrunch.com/2015/07/03/st...owner-to-grab-a-16-year-old-url/?ncid=tcdaily

 

[baseballworld]

Just another business trying to muscle someone out. In this case I think its wrong of the company to do.

 

[DomainVP]

If you read the details and the article, this guy is going to lose the domain if he does not get top notch counsel.

He made so many mistakes it's mind-boggling.

Every domain owner needs to educate themselves in Cybersquatting and UDRP laws.

The fact that he contacted them to sell the domain, has no content or use for the domain, and renewed after their TM was issued without preforming any due diligence to avoid confusion, may cost him this domain.

 

[Dave_Z]

If you read the details and the article, this guy is going to lose the domain if he does not get top notch counsel.

He made so many mistakes it's mind-boggling.

Every domain owner needs to educate themselves in Cybersquatting and UDRP laws.

The fact that he contacted them to sell the domain, has no content or use for the domain, and renewed after their TM was issued without preforming any due diligence to avoid confusion, may cost him this domain.

John Berryhill and Karen Bernstein represent Mr. Kneen:

http://domainnamewire.com/2015/07/03/workbetter-com-owner-fights-back-against-acpa-lawsuit/

As usual, none of them can respond (yet) until the case maybe concludes by then.

 

[djum]

If you read the details and the article, this guy is going to lose the domain if he does not get top notch counsel.

He made so many mistakes it's mind-boggling.

Every domain owner needs to educate themselves in Cybersquatting and UDRP laws.

The fact that he contacted them to sell the domain, has no content or use for the domain, and renewed after their TM was issued without preforming any due diligence to avoid confusion, may cost him this domain.

I've read the article and

1) "Harsh Mehta, approached Kneen about his domain"
it means that "he contacted them to sell the domain" is not true.

2) "Mehta filed an intent-to-use trademark application for Work Better on April 25, 2014, a few days after Kneen renewed the domain"
it means that "renewed after their TM was issued" is not true

It looks like that noname startup is trying to do reverse-hijacking. First they were trying to steal domain (transfer it from owners account without his consent), now trying to sue poor guy.

I like his lawyer response "While any number of unusual events are customarily associated with the first of April, claiming use of an internet domain name 28 days before its own registration as a domain name, is not likely to fool many."

That should point out how bogus is their claim that they have right to this domain.
Hopefully he's not only keeps the domain, but also get legal fees reimbursed and sues them for image damages. Reverse-hijacking is unacceptable.

 

[baseballworld]

I'm surprised you all really read the article? lol

 

[svede]

I was looking to see what happened with this and it looks like the case was dismissed? If so, I hope he counter-sues...
http://domainnamewire.com/2015/07/08/workbetter-com-lawsuit-dismissed-after-judge-disses-case/