DRS 07607 rottentomatoes.co.uk

[retired_member12]

I'm no solicitor, but I would assume that its an asset in the eyes of the law. Certainly plenty people have been dragged through court in relation to domain names. This thread is boring me already, if it gets to the point where this is a real concern for me, I'm dead already anyway. So with that, I'm out, unsubscribing thread !

?

Anyway, if you can show me a case in the UK where a domain name is deemed to be a legal asset, then I'd be very interested indeed to see the case number. Not where the registrant says its an asset, but where the Court says it.

 

[IanTurner]

Very much with you on that legal asset ruling DoubleTap.

Back to rottentomatoes.co.uk - Personally I had never heard of rottentomatoes.com before this thread and my immediate thought was of throwing them at somebody in the stocks.

 

[Beasty]

?

Anyway, if you can show me a case in the UK where a domain name is deemed to be a legal asset, then I'd be very interested indeed to see the case number. Not where the registrant says its an asset, but where the Court says it.

According to the registration contract, I think it is a contractual right or a license to use - which is capable of being a valuable asset.

Here however is what Lord Hoffman had to say in the House of Lords judgment in OBG v Allan (more famous for the Michael Douglas/Catherine Zeta Jones wedding photos spat - can't imagine why that was better tabloid fodder! ) :

I have no difficulty with the proposition that a domain name may be intangible property, like a copyright or trade mark,....​

To read the quote in context, it's at paragraph 101 of the judgment here.

BTW - that's not legal advice, just something that may or may not be relevant to DoubleTap's question.