Comments on: Insurance Company Loses Generic Domain Name Land Grab

By: Karen Bernstein

Karen Bernstein — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:31:27 +0000

This case had no merit whatsoever and it is just another one of those situations where a complainant thinks they can get a transfer just because they were able to obtain a federal trademark registration. There was evidence that the complainant abandoned any so-called “trademark rights” in the name at the time our client registered cheapautosinsurance.com. In this case, the complainant knew they had no trademark rights and filed the complaint anyway well knowing that they weren’t using the domain name when the client registered the domain name but brought the arbitration proceeding against them anyway. They somehow thought that running high legal bills with a big law firm and presenting the Panel with over 3,000 pages of useless documents (including the additional submission which weighed around 16 pounds) would get them a transfer. This should have been evidence alone to get a RDNH decision. The Panel’s refusal on both decisions to grant RDNH further highlights the fact that RDNH is a useless tool against preventing meritless claims. Ridiculous that the respondent shouldn’t be able to recover their fees after all the work that went into defending this case.

By: bernard

bernard — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 16:06:41 +0000

Tough times for domainers!

Poor income insufficient to cover basic costs, and now obliged to pay lawyers to keep such a bad name as CheapAutoInsurance.com

By: Chris

Chris — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 03:07:45 +0000

As long as there is value in something there will always be someone who tries to steal it or take it.

Look at the history of Gold from the Incas to modern day…

The good thing about this story is that they simply did not get away with what they tried to steal! Valid cases are normally very obvious cases of fraud. This is just a classic case of NAF Covering Their A’s on this one.

By: Tmbo

Tmbo — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 21:08:37 +0000

Wow. And I just recently handed my domain over to them thinking it was theirs because of the trademark issue. Very generic terms.

By: converter

converter — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 14:06:02 +0000

The BIG ?: Can atheists get insurance for acts of God?

By: Domain Name Wire » News » Insurance Company Loses Generic Domain …

Domain Name Wire » News » Insurance Company Loses Generic Domain … — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 13:20:36 +0000

[...] View original here: Domain Name Wire » News » Insurance Company Loses Generic Domain … [...]

By: Steve Jones

Steve Jones — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:43:34 +0000

At least at the end of the day they wasted a lot of money trying to do this. Still though, they should get fingered for a RDNH attempt – ridiculous that they thought they were entitled to these domains.