Dispute might be over business rather than cybersquatting.
A UDRP was filed against the generic domain name Bids.com yesterday, and this domain has an interesting history that suggests the issue might be bigger than cybersquatting.
The domain was previously owned by Bidz.com, a company that is selling off its assets through “a General Assignment for the benefit of creditors pursuant to California state law.” That’s kind of like a bankruptcy. Hilco Streambank is handling the auction of many of its brands and domains, including Bidz.com and JWL.com.
The domain Bids.com was transferred from Bidz.com to Leon Kuperman of LGK Consulting around the middle of 2012. Kuperman is the former President of Bidz.com.
It appears Bids.com is now being set up as a jewelry and accessories discount site; Bidz.com was a jewelry auction site.
National Arbitration Forum doesn’t publish the name of complainants until a case is concluded, but it’s possible we’re looking at a business dispute rather than a cybersquatting issue. I’ve reached out to Kuperman and another party that might have additional details and will update this story as they become available.
- See more at: http://domainnamewire.com/2014/09/2...it-might-be-interesting/#sthash.LTxRKnEf.dpuf
A UDRP was filed against the generic domain name Bids.com yesterday, and this domain has an interesting history that suggests the issue might be bigger than cybersquatting.
The domain was previously owned by Bidz.com, a company that is selling off its assets through “a General Assignment for the benefit of creditors pursuant to California state law.” That’s kind of like a bankruptcy. Hilco Streambank is handling the auction of many of its brands and domains, including Bidz.com and JWL.com.
The domain Bids.com was transferred from Bidz.com to Leon Kuperman of LGK Consulting around the middle of 2012. Kuperman is the former President of Bidz.com.
It appears Bids.com is now being set up as a jewelry and accessories discount site; Bidz.com was a jewelry auction site.
National Arbitration Forum doesn’t publish the name of complainants until a case is concluded, but it’s possible we’re looking at a business dispute rather than a cybersquatting issue. I’ve reached out to Kuperman and another party that might have additional details and will update this story as they become available.
- See more at: http://domainnamewire.com/2014/09/2...it-might-be-interesting/#sthash.LTxRKnEf.dpuf
