Is Nominet's policy killing the domain name secondary market ?

[ajudikat]

Nominet's DRS has confiscated another generic domain name.

Six years after the domain name was registered, Nominet has confiscated alternate.co.uk registered in July 1999
DRS Case alternate.co.uk

Does Nominet transfer it to one of the 30 UK companies registered at Companies House with the trading name "Alternate something or other"
http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk

No, Nominet transfer it to a German company with associated businesses in Netherlands and Spain (no mention of any UK associated businesses) which registered a trademark in 2001, 2 years after the domain name was registered.

The word "alternate" is generic.

Game.co.uk was a generic domain name registered in 1999 but that too was taken away from the domain name owner.

Are generic domain names safe ? Is Nominet's policy killing the domain name secondary market ?

 

[ratboy]

It was probably cheaper to DRS than to agree a price with this guy, as it was on for £10k.

Do you think this German company might be considering UK expansion ....???????

 

[FC Domains]

This is wrong.
Surely that specific registration has to be abusive, not that some others might be. Maybe Nominet could give a ruling on this.

The registrant didn't reply, but even so it looks straightforward.
As far as 'alternate.co.uk' goes, it's very difficult to see how it could be abusive. It doesn't seem to contravene any of the rules.

I doubt that the registrant has ever heard of this company and the domain wasn't linking to anything related to them. I assume it was registered purely as a generic word.

 

[Nigel]

Yes it does seem a very harsh decision and a very good point about companies house. Surely the 30 or so UK companies that use the english word 'alternate' have a much greater right to a .co.uk domain than a German company. In my view however, no-one should have exclusive right over a generic dictionary word apart from the person who had the foresight to register the domain first. It appears to me that the use of a community trade mark was probably the decisive factor. If so, that's the good old EU again allowing a foreign company to snatch a UK domain from a UK company and we are always so compliant! Can you imagine a Spanish or French registrar reaching the same decision?

 

[Fishfinger]

I wasn't too convinced by this other one below either. What a bunch of muppets.

DRS CASE 02839

 

[Nigel]

Big difference is that muppets is not a generic word that appears in the dictionary.

Just had a look thro' the list of DRS decisions on Nominet's website. Some of the attempts to secure domains from legitimate owners will make your hair stand on end. For example loans.co.uk trying to claim the domain loan.co.uk - amazing and true. Not surprisingly it failed but imagine the hassle and anxiety for the owner of loan.co.uk.

 

[Fishfinger]

Big difference is that muppets is not a generic word that appears in the dictionary.

Muppet does appear in UK dictionaries as:

Muppet: (informal) a stupid or weak person.

 

[Nigel]

It's not in my Collins GEM - but it was printed in 1987! - in any event I assume that it is only because of the muppets that it has become a term.

 

[ratboy]

[edited] sorry me being a plonker.

 

[Fishfinger]

*Independent Experts* that are neither independent nor experts. Cost of filing complaints too low. Cost of appeals too high. Inconsistencies.

Nominets shortcomings are well know.

The only way to beat the corporate bullies is to fight back. Unfortunately, the owner of alternate.co.uk did himself, and the rest of us, no favours by not bothering to turn up.

------------
Respondent
There was no Response to the Complaint so the only available information about the Respondent comes from the Complainant, and is outlined below
------------

 

[domaingenius]

What this all smacks of is money over fairness. What I would also look out for is ex clients or clients of the "Independent" adjudicator and/or the Nominet chairman who happens to be an ex solicitor.Not that I am implying anything, but I would look out for anything that could appear like bias towards the complainant or any reason that the independent adjudicator has for going in one or other direction other than a fair decision. How on earth she could rule for the German company is beyond me and lets hope that the thing goes to Court.

DG

 

[bb99]

Agreed - the respondent's fatal error was not to respond. In some DRS cases it can work out advantageous not to respond but, in this case, not so.

 

[bb99]

I cannot think of any where it's not advantageous to respond.

I can't specifically remember the individual cases, but I think in general terms it may be advantageous not to respond where the original complaint is very poor (ie short, badly put together, unclear, no backup, etc) and hence bound to fail.

 

[bb99]

Now I think about it, you're right. Always respond

 

[DropCatcher-co-uk]

Nominet's "independent" experts

The bias of Nominet's Dispute Resolution Service is almost beyond belief. The vast majority of its supposedly "impartial" experts are full time intellectual property solicitors whose sole purpose in life is to wrest control of our valuable property on behalf of large corporates like Apple Computer and Game plc.

These arrogant cretins even openly boast in their decisions of the complainants' "increasingly low burden of proof" of having to establish IP rights in their staked claims.

Having IP solicitors as the judge and jury to adjudicate on the disposition of disputed domain names worth thousands, tens of thousands and even hundreds of thousands of pounds is akin to empanelling juries or filling magistrates' benches with serving police officers.

Can you imagine if any of the big domain players applied to Nominet to become DRS panelists? They would be laughed out of the room.

 

[ratboy]

I've always found this DNS method of having "property" (I guess you may refer to it as) seized, as a most horrific penalty.

Just to add... I agree using a domain against a trademark is never going to be allowed, but why seize it? What right have they to seize property? T&C I know, but it certainly isn't "fair".

 

[DropCatcher-co-uk]

Out of pure interest, would you prefer it if the Independent Experts weren't IP specialists and solicitors? What about if they were bakers, chefs, road sweepers, cleaners, teachers, mechanics and cabin crew? .....

With regards to becoming an Independent Expert; have you tried applying? Next time they put the ad in The Gazette, see if you think your skills are relevant and consider applying. I'm going to take a look.

Good question and the answer is yes. I would strongly prefer if the panelists were drawn from other professions. It is obvious that suitable applicants would have to be educated professional people in their own fields as it is necessary to be able to intelligently grasp possibly complex situations, understand both sides of an argument and deliver concise, well written opinions. With no disrespect intended to the hard working men and women who do a sterling job in removing our refuse, I would feel nervous in having a roadsweeper with 1 grade D CSE in craftwork adjudicating the disposition of a £10K domain name of mine. I would feel more confident if a suitably qualified pharmacist or chartered accountant was handling the case.

It would obviously be difficult for me to apply as there are only a handful of major domain players who are not current or former customers of DropCatcher and I would have to decline to act in about 9 out of 10 cases put before me.

I very much look forward though to seeing your impressive powers of argument and balanced reasoning being brought to bear in future cases Dave! I feel sure that you would make an excellent panelist.

 

[Nigel]

What really irks me in this case is a German company using an EU community trademark to take an english word domain from a UK company. As an ardent eurosceptic we've been arguing for years about the powers being given to the EU and the way in which these powers gradually affect everybody i.e. fishing, agriculture, and now domain names . Even though the British public are also staunchly eurosceptic there are always plenty of EU friendly people to fill posts directly or indirectly linked to the EU be it Peter Mandleson, Neil Kinnock or for that matter, David Tatham the Nominet expert who took control of this case. Nominet list his profile here:

http://www.nominet.org.uk/DisputeResolution/Experts/DavidTatham.html

Note his time as president of the European Communities Trade Mark Association and if you go to the following link you will see that he is still a member of their council:

http://www.ecta.org/association_eb2.php

So get ready for more German and French takeovers as they register their community trademarks and with the approval of the UK registrar claim our english dictionary .uk domains from UK individuals and companies :cry: It's enough to make you weep.

 

[Nigel]

Interesting article on the website ecta.org where David Tatham describes his role as President of ECTA during 1994 -1996. Some of it quoted below - see link for full article.


My period as President of ECTA coincided with the realisation of a dream and the culmination of many years of effort and discussion, namely the commencement of the Community Trade Mark system. I was proud to represent ECTA at the opening of the Office in Alicante...

...During my Presidency, the European Community was enlarged by the addition of 3 new Member States ( Austria , Denmark and Finland ) and it fell to me to invite and subsequently appoint 6 new Council members from these countries...

The full article can be viewed here http://www.ecta.org/25_94.php

 

[Nigel]

Interesting points there invincible. From Mr Tatham's report it certainly appears that the Community trade mark was v important. This is what he says:

Complainant’s Rights
‘Alternate’ is a common English word. It does not exist in German (the language of the Complainant). Nevertheless, the Complainant has a valid Community trade mark registration for the word ALTERNATE covering a variety of goods and services, dated February 21, 2001. When making a comparison under the Policy, it is customary to disregard the suffix ‘.co.uk’ and, having done so, it is clear that the disputed domain name and the name in which the Complainant has rights are identical.

Are you seriously saying that you feel that a German trademark would have helped sway a Nominet expert to release a .co.uk english dictionary word to a German company in the same way that this community trade mark has?

Also worth noting that the community trade mark on alternate is dated February 21, 2001 wheras it appears from Nominet's whois that alternate.co.uk was registered prior to this on 28 July 1999. Yet I've scanned throught Mr Tatham's report and cannot see any comment about this. I always thought that the date of a trademark was important in deciding if something was an abusive registration i.e. how can it be an abusive registration if there was no trademark in place at the time? I would be interested to hear anyones views on this as I always thought it was an important factor.