Comments on: Heineken Wants Heineken.tel Domain Name

By: nSathees

nSathees — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 02:59:48 +0000

Heineken was too drunken to see the benefit of .tel domain name. This will replace all the yellow and white pages.

I own JohnnyWalker.tel and hope Johnnie Walker doesn’t come after it!

By the way anyone interested in securing ForexTrader.tel or ExchangeRates.tel contact me!

http://DomainStreet.tel

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:27:02 +0000

I think Heineken Espana filed based on the location of the domain owner.

By: daytonac

daytonac — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:22:55 +0000

i’m with you steve, these companies had 2 months to register there dottel, hell i registered my business name 4 ways, so noone could buy it any other way. So by them not registering the name, what real right do they have to this, thinking that (the .tel) would go nowhere, why bother, and if it did become popular,they’d come back later a claim it as it was theres all along. If that were the true, then we shouldn’t be able to register trademarked.tel’s, but it isn’t the case. I guess people are starting to work out that they should have purchased, as new apps are being made available through different programers on a regular basis now, making this a very exciting tld, expect more cases in the future i guess, but i believe each company that files for this action will have to have a damm good reason for not registering, beyond the $300 initial outlay for the purchase or they did’t know.
And ofcourse lastly why is Heineken Espana filing for this, should it not have been Heineken International B.V. challenging ownership of this dot tel. I can therefore only say, if you own a business and havn’t registered your dot tel, do it now, before someone else does, daytonac.tel

By: monstermadness

monstermadness — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 17:38:52 +0000

my favorite is moveon.tel – a slap at moveon.org, I think

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 19:54:57 +0000

I’ve the feeling the .tel domain has quite an appeal, beyond Web sites and therefore the lawsuits. Other domains were purchased upon release when the companies thought they meant something and ultimately gave up the process of doing so, soon before .tel was released.

They thought it another Web site and figured at that point they would say “go spit”…instead they had a rude awakening

Shouldn’t there be some cause for “inaction” to favor the current holder? Hienny had her chance, like everyone else to buy the domain during Trademark period, yet didn’t.

I say, snooze you loose

By: Primera disputa por un dominio .tel en España, tercera en el mundo | Dnzapping

Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:46:29 +0000

[...] España ha iniciado un procedimiento administrativo en la WIPO para obtener el dominio Heineken.tel (Caso [...]

By: Henry

Henry — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 05:53:49 +0000

UDRP as presently constituted is a flawed process. But a case like this does not help domainers’ cause. We can do a lot to help ourselves.

While trademark holders have every right to defend their mark in whatever form it is abused, “first use” rights cannot be ignored either when a mark is registered after the fact. The UDRP is becoming a de facto medium to wrest generic domain names away from their legitimate registrants under the pretext of bad faith. Sooner or later, parking a domain name may constitute bad faith.

Like the Attorney in the case previously written about on this site, “cheapautosinsurance.com” rightfully pointed out, domainers need to do something about these meritless domain disputes. The full text of her comments can be found here: http://www.individual.com/story.php?story=103582594