Domain investors keep doing stupid things.
Attorney John Berryhill has seen a lot in his years practicing domain name and trademark law. He sees domain investors do the same silly things over and over. On this episode, Berryhill walks through examples of what not to do. John explains what the best trademark database is, all about those Libra cryptocurrency domain names as well as .org price increases.
Also: Michael Jackson, .UK, Addicting.com, big domain sales, Tucows’ phone deal and more.
This week’s sponsor: NameSilo. Use coupon code DNWPod to save $1 on your next domain.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 46:25 — 37.2MB) | Embed
Subscribe via Apple Podcasts to listen to the Domain Name Wire podcast on your iPhone or iPad, view on Google Play Music, or click play above or download to begin listening. (Listen to previous podcasts here.)
So that part about the final hour response followed by quick reaction of the other party. I thought UDRP is kind of a non-stop thing, once someone filed, it has to continue until the resolution.
From this story it appears it is really not, if sides come to some kind of mutual understanding, it can be stopped, and the whole event won’t become available to the public, is that correct, or did I misunderstand something?
If it is, I assume, when someone files against a domainer, and domainer admits guilt, he can like “hey, i’m sorry, here’s the transfer code, lets forget it bro”, and their names wont get mentioned anywhere and no public stain on the reputation?
Yes and no. I think it has to be by mutual agreement of the parties to terminate a case. John?
“he can like “hey, i’m sorry, here’s the transfer code, lets forget it bro””
The registrar is required to lock the name unless the registrar is informed otherwise by the dispute resolution provider. So, the procedure takes a bit more than that.
The procedure is UDRP Rule 17:
Settlement or Other Grounds for Termination
(a) If, before the Panel’s decision, the Parties agree on a settlement, the Panel shall terminate the administrative proceeding. A settlement shall follow steps 17(a)(i) – 17(a)(vii):
(i) The Parties provide written notice of a request to suspend the proceedings because the parties are discussing settlement to the Provider.
(ii) The Provider acknowledges receipt of the request for suspension and informs the Registrar of the suspension request and the expected duration of the suspension.
(iii) The Parties reach a settlement and provide a standard settlement form to the Provider further to the Provider’s supplemental rules and settlement form. The standard settlement form is not intended to be an agreement itself, but only to summarize the essential terms of the Parties’ separate settlement agreement. The Provider shall not disclose the completed standard settlement form to any third party.
(iv) The Provider shall confirm to the Registrar, copying the Parties, the outcome of the settlement as it relates to actions that need to be taken by the Registrar.
(v) Upon receiving notice from the Provider further to 17(a)(iv), the Registrar shall remove the Lock within two (2) business days.
(vi) The Complainant shall confirm to the Provider that the settlement as it relates to the domain name(s) has been implemented further to the Provider’s supplemental rules.
(vii) The Provider will dismiss the proceedings without prejudice unless otherwise stipulated in the settlement.
Isn’t the best Trademark Database: Trademark.best ?
Very good info Mr Berryhill, Thanks for taking the time out to discuss this. Very helpful.
What are your thoughts on TM issues of terms booking and hotels. Generic but thousands of companies use term booking. If someone say bought booking1 or bookingworld would booking then what? any thoughts.
It’s too bad for Democrats the comments about inferring intent from facts, evidence and circumstances could not have been taught to people a few years ago. If anyone ever knew about any of that before, the Democratic primary would not have been successfully rigged and stolen, HRC would’ve been out where she belonged, and it is a virtual certainty Sanders would be the president now. I’m just wondering how an attorney in a field like this is the only person in the country who ever knew all that about intent, though.
But you know the saying about tangled webs and weaving… And this time around the one Democrats should be looking at is Tulsi Gabbard first before Sanders. And I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican, wouldn’t you know, so I wonder who is going to tell me who to look at.
Never would have guessed in a thousand years that’s what J. Berryhill sounds like.
If people need to conserve time, I recommend increasing playback speed.
This interview reminded me of the current “existential threat”:
1. The removal of price regulation on .com is looming just around the corner. It is “domageddon.” .Org and the other legacies are the beginning of course.
2. Some of what JB here said seems to answer some of this: https://onlinedomain.com/2019/07/03/domain-name-news/ica-asks-icann-for-explanation-of-org-decision/#comment-372801.
Great interview, thanks John B!
I was not expecting an employee of Neustar to appear but you are just in time. I realize it may be outside your official purview but are you able to shed any light on why 2018 came and went but American citizens and businesses are still waiting for a whois privacy option since April 2002? You can read more about why I mention 2018 in particular here:
https://onlinedomain.com/2017/10/10/domain-name-news/us-town-hall-key-points-neustar-totally-ignored-question/
Specifically,
“Neustar said that they are working on the whois privacy implementation for .us domain names. That was never allowed up to now, mainly because of the Nexus requirements. Only US residents and US organizations and companies that have a bona fide presence in the United States of America can own a .us domain name.
According to Neustar that has been their biggest policy issue to date. The Council formed subcommittees, solicited public comment and worked with law enforcement (?) and other stakeholders to build a consensus recommendation. It seems that .us whois privacy may be introduced in 2018.”
Thanks.