Cricket.com domain name challenged as cybersquatting.
The storied domain name Cricket.com has been hit with a UDRP according to records at National Arbitration Forum.
Although National Arbitration Forum does not disclose who the complainant is until after a case is decided, it’s possible that it’s wireless company Cricket Communications. The company uses MyCricket.com as its domain name and has used National Arbitration Forum in the past to recover domain names.
Cricket.com was owned by Live Current Media for a long time, and for a while featured ads for wireless phones. Then the company developed it out at the same time it struck a long term deal to provide another web site for Indian Premier League (IPL) cricket.
The deal with IPL later collapsed. Live Current Media eventually sold the Cricket.com domain name as well.
So how could Cricket Wireless go after Cricket.com when the site is clearly developed as a fantasy cricket game?
Just look at the ads on the site. Every single Google Adsense ad is for a wireless provider. There’s even an affiliate ad for wireless services.
A thinly veiled attempt to masquerade as a cricket site while generating ad revenue based on the now famous Cricket Communications brand? That would be a huge leap for a UDRP panelist to make. If it really is the wireless carrier who’s going after this domain, then this is a case best settled in the courts rather than within the narrow confines UDRP.
The site owner should have just blocked all adsense for the US, I’m sure in other countries the adsense ads triggered will be about the sport as I think the term has no connotation of wireless devices elsewhere. If the owner had/has no bad intentions then I feel sorry for them. This is going to be a stressful UDRP.
Following on from the above, in the UK all ads are for cricket (the sport).
Looking over the content of Cricket.com, it appears the words “wireless”, “cell”, and “phone” are found nowhere in the copy. It’s hard to see the Adsense algorithm associating Cricket.com with cell phones.
My guess is the Cricket Communications ads are coming from affiliates using the Google AdWords Managed Placement option where you can specify certain domains or URLs where you want your ads to show. Without the owner going in and playing whack-a-mole with every advertiser, they aren’t going to be able to prevent those ads.
It will be an interesting case to see play out.
Yep, showing sport / gambling related ads in the UK. To a degree, it’s out of the site owners hands which ads are shown. This is a direct example of why Google shouldn’t be allowed to take bids on brand names from competing companies.
From Canada: most of the ads are related to cricket sport.
It’s going to be an interesting case to follow.
Domains can be taken in consideration as property. They fullfill aspects of property (as you literaly own them while you’re paying regfee). People sell them, transfer them, rent them.
So (if law doesn’t make exception for a special kind of property) only competent court (usually territorial competence) can takes individuals property.
Judge is competent by education and state given authority to decide cases by LAW.
If one day I lose one single domain I will sue WIPO or National Arbitration Forum for “property theft” and panelist for “abuse of competence”.
There’s no government given authority to panelist to take my property.
Just look at the ads on the site. Every single Google Adsense ad is for a wireless provider. There’s even an affiliate ad for wireless services.”
Funny, because MyCricket can easily block any ads on cricket.com. So, it’s a scam not to pay the real price. If Cricket is not a generic name, I don’t know what is.
When a term has a obvious generic use with thousands of potential end users, one niche use should not be able to take ownership of a generic domain like this.
If someone owned Apple.com and it had a few apple products ads I am still not sure why Apple Computers would have rights to the domain over everyone who actually sells Apples.
UDRP was designed for obvious squatting, not this. The recourse for a company in this type of situation is to sue the domain owner.
Brad
@I’m ShuwiX
“There’s no government given authority to panelist to take my property.”
Not sure that that is true but irrelevant in any event as you agreed to the UDRP as part of the reg terms, ie UDRP is based on an agreement that you are party to, nothing to do with Govt given, or any other third party right, but rather a right you yourself gave panellists.
From south asia (Sri Lanka), All ads are purely related to cricket sport and i can’t see any ads related to cricket wireless (communication service provider). Will be a Very interesting case this would be…
Cool to see we even have domainers in Sri Lanka. Live there or on holiday?
Cricket has been a sport for centuries, this wireless company has been in existence for couple of years.
Cricket.com has been a cricket oriented site for over a decade. If for some crazy reason they loose the decision hope they sue. I also think Indian courts system should get involved since some of the partners are based in India.
Wronged domain owners should sue in the court systems always !!
Thou shall not display competitor’s ads on a web site that has a domain name similar to a major brand.
@jp : Born and living in 🙂
Steve C has it right.
How is the word cricket connected to cell phones. How was Cricket Communications even granted this trademark? It is the cell phone company that should be blocked from using the word Cricket? How can you even make No 2 sport name a trademark? Cricket is now one of the fastest growing sport in the US and also several other countries. The Cricket trademark registration and “hijack” cricket.com by a cellphone seller should be immediately blocked.