SSM
Established Member
- Impact
- 76
- 418 views
- 11 replies
- 1 point
I've searched and read a lot of posts but I'm still confused about certain aspects of UDRP and specifically the risks involved when purchasing premium domains with the intent to flip.
I understand when the domains in question are similar to a well known brand, i.e. Apple, Facebook, Amazon etc. That makes perfect sense. What I don't understand is when the words and more generic or specific, and claims are made. An example:
Towels.com comes up for sale and is purchased by a domain flipper. However, Towels.co.uk has been going for 10 years. A very specific word that is more than likely to be used for selling towels. However, does the latter then have a good chance of claiming towels.com via the UDRP process? (Note: towels is an example and not a domain I own nor am looking to purchase).
If the .co.uk owners were able to pursue and win a URDP case, purely based on having built a brand over a number of years, how is it possible that any one word dot coms can be sold without imposing huge risks?
These days everything is either A) Trademarked or B) registered on other extensions.
If the word is more generic, its easier to understand (to an extent) as the associated word could be used in a different capacity.
I.e. Monday.com could be a SaaS website whilst Monday.co.uk could be setup as a news website. But for words that are more
specific, how big are the risks and if they're that big, how is it these domains are ever sold rather than just thought via UDRP?
Another example would be domain.com vs domains.com - Surely as its a generic word, one cant purse another?
The reason I ask, isnt due to trademark per-se but rather threads I have read on here and elsewhere that indicated successful UDRP claims against owners because a domain was purchased with the intent of selling, and therefore wasnt in good faith.
You can do this with real estate, but with domains its a big issue? #Confused.
I understand when the domains in question are similar to a well known brand, i.e. Apple, Facebook, Amazon etc. That makes perfect sense. What I don't understand is when the words and more generic or specific, and claims are made. An example:
Towels.com comes up for sale and is purchased by a domain flipper. However, Towels.co.uk has been going for 10 years. A very specific word that is more than likely to be used for selling towels. However, does the latter then have a good chance of claiming towels.com via the UDRP process? (Note: towels is an example and not a domain I own nor am looking to purchase).
If the .co.uk owners were able to pursue and win a URDP case, purely based on having built a brand over a number of years, how is it possible that any one word dot coms can be sold without imposing huge risks?
These days everything is either A) Trademarked or B) registered on other extensions.
If the word is more generic, its easier to understand (to an extent) as the associated word could be used in a different capacity.
I.e. Monday.com could be a SaaS website whilst Monday.co.uk could be setup as a news website. But for words that are more
specific, how big are the risks and if they're that big, how is it these domains are ever sold rather than just thought via UDRP?
Another example would be domain.com vs domains.com - Surely as its a generic word, one cant purse another?
The reason I ask, isnt due to trademark per-se but rather threads I have read on here and elsewhere that indicated successful UDRP claims against owners because a domain was purchased with the intent of selling, and therefore wasnt in good faith.
You can do this with real estate, but with domains its a big issue? #Confused.
Last edited: