woohoo

Does anyone know whether there has been any ruling by DRS that bad faith can be passed from the original registrant to a buyer of that domain , or can it be "washed" by such sale ?. If there is would that change if the seller was to give a written contract to buyer that it is sold free of all and any encumbrances etc ?.

K

woopwoop

I would assume that it isn't necessarily washed, but is more on a case by case basis.

If the new registrant bought the domain with a purpose in mind that was completely separate from any possibly complainant, then they'd probably be fine.

If the new owner was a relative of someone who made an abusive registration, and the relative had no clear business owning the domain then then it seems likely that bad faith has traveled with the transfer.

I think that written contracts/encumbrances etc. don't change anything really.

__________________
Connect with me @ TW:LI:FB | MyWeb | D/L domains4sale | Morecambe London Student Forums Student Books UK promotions agencies

namealot

Seen people selling, moving names around not seen it making any difference other than time delaying if the complainant has a good case for the name .
Why are they saying it was “bad faith” has the old owner had any form of correspondence with the complainant?

Do you think they have a case?

The old owner other than they are selling you the name there unlikely to be an entity that can grant any true immunity, You probably wouldn’t be responsible for any previous actions unless the complainant could prove you had knowledge prior to transfer they then could argue you were “accessory” they would need evidence though… (some thing posted a letter etc) Just changing the owner doesn’t lesson the complainant’s case just who is responcible at that time ?It would help if the new owner had legitimate use for the name rights trademark, trading name etc they would have a stronger case to keep it …

pred

well, seeing as the lunatics have taken over the asylum, it can get even worse than that
http://domainincite.com/renew-a-domain-lose-a-udrp/

theres a lot of sense in .uk rulings at least tbh and mediation

udrp and wipo are quintessentially a bunch of corrupt arseholes, taking backhanders from the corporate lobbyists, no doubt

the problem with any laws is theres loopholes lawyers wriggle through

for example you have a domain in 2000 , its generic two word phrase
no tm
its parked showing food and dieting ads say
7 years later someone regges a tm in gym equipment
1 year after that they file a udrp. you're gonna lose

if they changed ads deliberately then maybe but everyone is allowed to sit on a nice brandable surely, till the time comes when ready to develop or sell?

the goalposts are changing on a daily basis

if this bs continues where they say just by renewing shows bad faith. geez
only the rich domainers can afford to put 10 years on all their coms and head off back to the infinity pool!

__________________
Litigation | Legal Aid | Aquatics

woopwoop

I'm finding this more incentive to get off my bum and develop.

I think that even just a small effort in development could offer a lot of protection. I think that 95+% of my domains I buy with development one day in mind - so I need to put up a few pages on each and a logo.

Parking has never really worked because there is minimal type ins for my domains, the low payoff combined with the risk (in parking) that so many DRS's contain make me want to stay away from it.

__________________
Connect with me @ TW:LI:FB | MyWeb | D/L domains4sale | Morecambe London Student Forums Student Books UK promotions agencies

woohoo

Well said, entirely true, yes they are 99.9% arseholes, although got to exclude the ones that have ruled in my favour ,lol.

I am searching for a solicitor that knows what he/she is doing and more importantly will fight for an alleged domainer (not admitted though).

By way during my unfruitful search so far found this quote from an obvious exaggerating solicitor;

"Again, swift action is key to a successful and effecient resolution in cases of cybersquatting. It may be that there are potentially criminal solutions that need to be considered and we have had cybersquatting cases in the past where we have involved the FBI. " LOL, yes sure ,BS but gets the brainless clients thinking "this guy must be good" .

Back to serious, please send me your recommendations for solicitors to use to defend DRS.
By the way please could someone remind me what the 3 hurdles are with DRS, and do I defend successfully if
I show only 1 ??

Thanks
K