Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2004


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 59396
interpreted = N
texte = >Are there not rules & regulations in place governing the blatant poaching of domains? Well, yes and no. Poaching would be if someone registered the domain in bad faith *before* you used it and then tried to charge you $$ for it. Unfortunately, in your case, the registration happened *after* you/your client had presumably been reminded (via email) to renew the registration, or failing that, it would be reasonable to assume that when you/your client registered the domain the last time that the term of the registration (1 year?) would indicate thet the domain would need to be renewed at the end of the term. Bottom line is that you/your client failed to renew the domain name and therefore it became 'fair game'. You can pay around $1500 to ICANN to 'hear' your case, but I'm positive that you will be wasting your $$... better to try to spend less than $1500 to buy the domain back if it's worth it to you/your client. Sucks, but I've been in a similar situation, and I actually have a current U.S. Federal Trademark relating to a domain dispute I was pursuing in the past. Bottom line was that I was unlikely to be able to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the other guy acted in bad faith when he registered the confusingly similar domain name in dispute... so my choice was to take my $1500 chance with ICANN or pay the bastard $3000 for the domain. Ultimately, I decided that it wasn't worth pursuing at all and gave up. Here's the ICANN link for your info: http://www.icann.org/udrp/udrp.htm -Dan ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
  1. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( "Dan Strong" 2004)
  2. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( "Sal D'Anna" 2004)
  3. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( "Sal D'Anna" 2004)
  4. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Gary Krockover 2004)
  5. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Matthew A Perosi 2004)
  6. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( John Peacock 2004)
  7. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Matthew A Perosi 2004)
  8. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Donovan Brooke 2004)
  9. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Donovan Brooke 2004)
  10. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Donovan Brooke 2004)
  11. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Matthew A Perosi 2004)
  12. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Brian Fries 2004)
  13. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( John Peacock 2004)
  14. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Alan White 2004)
  15. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Matthew A Perosi 2004)
  16. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Rob Marquardt 2004)
  17. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Kenneth Grome 2004)
  18. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Stuart Tremain 2004)
  19. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( "Dan Strong" 2004)
  20. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( "Dan Strong" 2004)
  21. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Rob Marquardt 2004)
  22. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( 2004)
  23. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( "Sal D'Anna" 2004)
  24. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Alan White 2004)
  25. Re: [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Matthew A Perosi 2004)
  26. [OT] Theiving B*****ds ( Alan White 2004)
>Are there not rules & regulations in place governing the blatant poaching of domains? Well, yes and no. Poaching would be if someone registered the domain in bad faith *before* you used it and then tried to charge you $$ for it. Unfortunately, in your case, the registration happened *after* you/your client had presumably been reminded (via email) to renew the registration, or failing that, it would be reasonable to assume that when you/your client registered the domain the last time that the term of the registration (1 year?) would indicate thet the domain would need to be renewed at the end of the term. Bottom line is that you/your client failed to renew the domain name and therefore it became 'fair game'. You can pay around $1500 to ICANN to 'hear' your case, but I'm positive that you will be wasting your $$... better to try to spend less than $1500 to buy the domain back if it's worth it to you/your client. Sucks, but I've been in a similar situation, and I actually have a current U.S. Federal Trademark relating to a domain dispute I was pursuing in the past. Bottom line was that I was unlikely to be able to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the other guy acted in bad faith when he registered the confusingly similar domain name in dispute... so my choice was to take my $1500 chance with ICANN or pay the bastard $3000 for the domain. Ultimately, I decided that it wasn't worth pursuing at all and gave up. Here's the ICANN link for your info: http://www.icann.org/udrp/udrp.htm -Dan ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ "Dan Strong"

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Top Articles:

Talk List

The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...

Related Readings:

price change help (1998) [Announce] Newest Commerce Site based on WebCatalog (1997) Merging databases (1997) RE: PIXO support (1997) Banner ads example (1997) Inventory Debit Procedure (1998) shownext problems (1998) Image editing in browser (2005) Addition: Image size tags (2000) SKU (1997) Fun with dates (1997) why won't this work, please tell me??? (2001) eChecks (2000) Where is f2? (1997) HELP WITH DATES (1997) Blocking form spam (2006) Queertrons? (1997) Attention SM: Trigger Bug? (2000) AppleScript/.db (was:FTP to WebStar) (2001) Umm...about those log files? (Off Topic) (1997)