Domain Manage

Email asking for eu domain bought on 7th April

Discussion in 'Domain Name Disputes' started by ScottJ, May 11, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ScottJ United Kingdom

    ScottJ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    13
    I reg'd an eu on the 7th April and today I receive an email

    It's not really my fault they never secured the domain during sunrise 2, I certainly didnt try and secure it during the sunrise, I bought it in an open market on 7th April and don't know if they really have any rights? Further I have never even heard of them as its basically quite a general term, something along the lines of insurance4.eu but in another genre.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2006
  2. Domain Forum

    Acorn Domains Elite Member

    Joined:
    1999
    Messages:
    Many
    Likes Received:
    Lots
     
  3. Ellis United Kingdom

    Ellis Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2005
    Posts:
    814
    Likes Received:
    9
    Name and Shame Time!

    It's not your fault at all - ask them to take it up with their registrar if they're not happy - that'll take them a few months

    Regardless of the domain you are perfectly entitled to it

    This is funny

    "As a matter of our goodwill, we would be happy to reimburse you for the registration fee you paid to register the domain."

    Don't budge an inch and name your own price
     
  4. ScottJ United Kingdom

    ScottJ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    13
    I have heard that if you offer to sell the domain then you are making it easier for the domain to be taken away from you - seeing as your then seen to be trying to profit from their TM?

    They do have TM beside their name on their websites (loans4)

    I did reply and stated that I never applied for their domain during the sunrise 1 or 2 and that they had plenty of opportunity if they felt that they had the right to it, I bought it on the 7th when it was open to the public.

    Ball is back in their court I guess.
     
  5. tifosi United Kingdom

    tifosi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2004
    Posts:
    3,128
    Likes Received:
    45
    If they had correctly gone through the sunrise period they would have been instructed to provide documentation to prove this.

    That they hadn't, or it was rejected, meant that it was available at landrush.
     
  6. texidriver

    texidriver Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2005
    Posts:
    488
    Likes Received:
    13
     
  7. singlefile

    singlefile Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2004
    Posts:
    247
    Likes Received:
    2
    Do not offer to sell. If I were you, I'd simply ignore them.
     
  8. tmsdomreg

    tmsdomreg Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2006
    Posts:
    123
    Likes Received:
    2
    If they had applied for it during the Sunrise period it wouldn't have been available for general purchase on April 7 (even if the application had failed).

    As I understand it, the first batch of Sunrise failed domains are being published on May 24 for release June 10.

    Peter
     
  9. Beasty

    Beasty Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    595
    Likes Received:
    8
    You may want to google "phone4u.co.uk" to find some info about a High Court action from last year between Phones4U and a guy who registered phone4u.co.uk. The matter has now been heard in the Court of Appeal and judgment is awaited - but as things stand the registrant of phone4u.co.uk won and was allowed to keep his domain by the High Court.

    PM me if you want a full copy of the High Court judgment - I don't think it's published online on any free databases. The Appeal judgment was listed to be handed down a while ago - but was then put back. I'd expect it to be out sometime in the fairly near future.
     
  10. ScottJ United Kingdom

    ScottJ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    13
    Thanks for that, I'll wait to hear back from them - if they get back.
     
  11. Beasty

    Beasty Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    595
    Likes Received:
    8
    No worries. When LJ Jacob delivers his judgment on the phone4u.co.uk case, I'll post a link on here.
     
  12. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    Beasty; I would humbly suggest you need to differentiate between DRS and civil court cases. In the Phone4U civil case, I think it is clear that Mr Heykali was trading in phones, in his own right since 1999. Full details of this case here.

    Here's an excerpt. Mr Heykali said: "I registered phone4u.co.uk in August 1999 long before I ever heard of Phones 4U. I have always traded honestly and attract customers because of my low prices, not because they think I am anything to do with Phones 4U”.

    In respect of the differences between DRS decisions and civil court decisions The Register quotes Nominet's solicitor Edward Phillips as below.

    Whilst I do not disagree with your general comments, I think it is always prudent to offer advice that encompasses the differences in the DRS system and civil courts, as DRS decisions may be reached on different criteria than those set in a civil court, and we all need to recognise this. I trust you will at least acknowledge there may be different criteria in the two systems?

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2006
  13. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    And as an aside, .EU registrations are actually facilitated by the Prague-based Arbitration Court in the Czech Republic. So whether or not one could get an ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution Policy) transferred to an English civil court, is arguable.

    However, there are already 3 ADR decisions here and they make interesting reading: www.adreu.eurid.eu/adr/decisions/index.php

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
  14. Beasty

    Beasty Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    595
    Likes Received:
    8
    JAC - Firstly I did not offer any "advice". I merely commented that sji2671 might find the phone4u.co.uk case of interest - given the similarity in the domains and given that some of the judge's reasoning referred to the generic nature of the 4u part of the name.

    Secondly, I didn't notice any refernce to a choice of forum (Court or EURid) in the email complaining about the domain. So I don't know which is more relevant to this complaint. If it were a Court claim, it would seem likely that it would be brought in the UK. It certainly would not be a DRS case though.

    As an aside, I agree with you that the DRS does have different rules and standards to those in the Courts. We might all consider the likely outcome of the phone4u.co.uk case under the DRS - I know who my money would have been on! ;)

    However, if the "rights" that someone is seeking to protect are those "enforceable under English law" then it seems clear to me that - if those rights have been considered in the High Court or beyond - then the analysis done there should bind (or at least guide strongly) the Experts. The Nominet contract, to which Ed Phillips refers (quite rightly) that the DRS stems from, is also governed by English law
     
  15. sneezycheese

    sneezycheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2005
    Posts:
    550
    Likes Received:
    15
    Apologies for this post as it’s not directly related to the question started in this thread, but I couldn’t resist following up on Jac’s quote from Ed P.
    Jac - Ed also said in the same interview:

    I've highlighted the relevent bits.


    Maybe Ed (or Jac even) can tell me why 'when requested' Ed does NOT let certain 'individuals' have 'specific' copies of correspondences between the 'expert' and Nominet. :confused:

    ...anything to hide sir? :rolleyes:

    In the absence of any specific (and legitimate) justification, I’ll let everybody draw their own conclusions... ;)
     
  16. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    Well; if yer gonna get all legally pedantic on me then yes, "professional advice" is different from advice or comment given freely on fora; but I didn't mean to imply you were offering your professional advice, only that it is always prudent to offer advice that encompasses the differences in the DRS system and civil courts. Otherwise (bless their cotton pickin' socks) people may well assume you are indeed offering "advice". I know I did; and you know what happens when you ass/u/me don't cha? You make an ass out of u and me. ;)

    As a personal opinion, I think what swayed the court judgement in favour of the existing registrant was the fact he had used the domain name for his own trade since August 1999 and from March 2000 as a website. From what I can tell, he also registered phone4U.com as far back as December 1998. Those are fairly convincing facts; and please note my use of the word "facts". :p

    I think you would agree that "rights" in any civil court case are actually determined by the court? Similarly, I would have to contend m'lud that the "rights" in any DRS dispute have to be determined by the Expert presiding over said dispute. The comment Ed Phillips made last year to the Register, highlighted the differences in modus operandi between both systems. For the sake of clarity I will repeat the relevant bit.

    "In a civil law case the cause of action will be 'passing off' or registered trade mark infringement: in the DRS the Expert is considering the narrower question of (a) does the Complainant have rights and (b) is the registration or use of the name 'abusive'. This distinction has always been there, and arises because the DRS simply solves a dispute under the contract of registration, not a larger problem, as the courts seek to."

    So when you say "if those rights have been considered in the High Court or beyond - then the analysis done there should bind (or at least guide strongly) the Experts", I would have to contend that each case; whether in court or DRS; should be determined on its own merits. That is, in essence, what civil court cases do; make decisions based on the available evidence. So does the DRS. I would also contend (in my humble opinion) that neither are perfect, which is why both allow for appeal.

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2006
  17. bb99 United Kingdom

    bb99 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2005
    Posts:
    1,598
    Likes Received:
    38
    Pot / kettle......... :rolleyes:
     
  18. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    Wrong analogy old boy. :rolleyes:

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
  19. Jac

    Jac Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    660
    Likes Received:
    12
    Not like you to be so cynical sneezy... :rolleyes: ... but you'll have to take it up with Nominet, I don't have any of the 'specific' copies you refer to.

    It is very difficult to draw any reasonable conclusion from just one side of an argument sneezy; especially one that is entirely devoid of objectivity. Didn't I suggest you should get on with your life, or are you set on wasting it on embittered pursuits? I doubt anyone on his deathbed will ever say, I wish I'd spent more time hating Nominet. :???:

    Regards
    James Conaghan
    [PAB Member]
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2006
  20. sneezycheese

    sneezycheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2005
    Posts:
    550
    Likes Received:
    15
    ...Maybe as a Nominet PAB Member you could ask Ed for copies. :rolleyes: ...it would seem a natural choice for a "concerned" PAB Member, such as yourself. ;)

    ...Deleting 'expert' findings 'after the fact' - I guess from your 'objective reasoning' that's OK, is it???

    ...'Probably' most of us on this forum as 'Domainers' (in one way or another) worry about the DRS and 'if' or 'when' it's going to 'hit', so it's important that the DRS and Nominet are seen to be and more importantly are 'Above Reproach'!!! :)
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2006
  21. olebean

    olebean Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    29
    Sneezy

    I don't nesacarily worry about the DRS, I am more concerned with the areas of business, such as the internet industry I.e " key stakeholder groups : Government, business, academia and intelectual property" who have representatives on the PAB and PAB members who represent the local Internet community......

    So Jac

    Who do you represent......???

    What do you consider the wider stakeholder community??
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page