information ADO.com Lost in UDRP Because Of Having A Domain Portfolio Page????

[Silentptnr]

Just read this. It's too bad. What a great domain.

"the Mexican company utilized the Respondent’s public domain portfolio of short domains, as featured at Catchy.com, to claim that it’s a “for profit” activity. Some of the logos on Catchy.com look like those of other marks, according to the Complainant."

I really don't like this decision. Am I wrong?

https://domaingang.com/domain-law/three-letter-com-domain-ado-com-lost-via-the-udrp-process/

 

[DomainVP]

having it listed on sedo is already proof enough yuo are trying to sell.. and they can use that against you

correct.

It's just icing on the cake if they can establish TM rights.

The counter to all of this is to prove that your domain is generic and that you have the right to sell because of its wide use across industries.

Of course if it's a brand domain this is going to be hard to achieve, unless it's a commonly used brand name like "Weather Tech" or "Sky Drone(s)". One could argue that although this is a brand, it's a brand that uses generic terms that reasonably expected to be used often.

With all of this said, if you are in the wrong and offer to sell then there is little recourse here.

The procedure is vast, and there is never any one clear cut path unless you have all of the facts laid out in front of you.

 

[alcy]

sounds like the life of domainer is full of traps... though I personally never had tm issues so far. and they can be avoided if you pay attention.

apparently, there is serious talks of some upcoming changes to the process that could make it easy for just about anyone to get any domain from any domainer. i hope its just rumors that won't work out. else domaining could fall to pieces.

 

[Joe70]

He did not know that brand existed, so how could that even be true? He knew 2 things, it is a French word (where he is from) and an English word.

Come on. This guy bought ADO.com but never Googled ADO, where *every hit on the first page* refers to the bus company? If he argued that, he deserved to lose.

 

[Smiles76]

Looks like a great decision imo. Especially when they point out several logos of the defendant’s domains that mimic TM holders. The owner went out of his way to create images confusingly similar to well known brands, on confusingly similar domains!

Busted!!!

I agree. Also, his greed was his downfall. He probably received many offers for that name but was waiting for his "lottery ticket" offer than ultimately never came.

 

[NoBS]

I agree. Also, his greed was his downfall. He probably received many offers for that name but was waiting for his "lottery ticket" offer than ultimately never came.

An initial quote of six figs for any 3l .com is pretty standard. No way an experienced domain investor would start negotiating at 5 figs.

 

[Joe70]

“Six figures” and $500,000 are two different things in this context. Nobody’s asking $500,000 and then selling for $20,000 to $50,000, where most LLLs seem to sell.

 

[NoBS]

20-50k is reseller pricing. Much of the 3l .com on the market for this price don't have clear end users or inquiries from them, so they get passed on like a hot potato investor to investor for cashflow, or there's a exciting domain they need right now, or whatever. 500k for ado is exactly what I'd be quoting. Maybe I'd settle for half that. No way I'm letting it go for 5 figures unless I need to liquidate.

 

[-AR-]

Some of the arguments here are not making sense. Now everyone who buys a domain as a reseller will Google the domain to see its results. Secondly what the asking price is has nothing to do with anyone, that is down to the seller.

The logo issue can be argued but that is a matter of opinion and what each individual sees. No reference was made to a bus company or a transportation business in the domain listing.

There are probably thousands on possible acronyms for ADO which leads to the question as to why is a Mexican bus company eligible for the domain name and not a design company from the US? Or another business from another part of the world.

Ranking top on Google does not give anyone the right over any domain name, does it? In a democratic system you can put any price you like on things you own. So the panels questioning of the price makes you wonder whether the panelists were from North Korea?

From what I can see, the only future for domain investors is to create mini websites and put the business (including the domain name) up for sale. E.g. if ado.com was website about tigers I am sure it would have avoided this issue. While you are selling the business the value lies in the domain name but it will get allow domainers to get around this issue.

 

[dcember]

This name still redirects to catchy. Am I missing something here?

 

[BrandMart]

Come on. This guy bought ADO.com but never Googled ADO, where *every hit on the first page* refers to the bus company? If he argued that, he deserved to lose.

Not really.

 

[Joe70]

... 500k for ado is exactly what I'd be quoting. Maybe I'd settle for half that. No way I'm letting it go for 5 figures unless I need to liquidate.

This is an explicit argument in favor of ADO winning this case. You’re basically admitting that the domain’s value stems solely from the brand ADO has built up over decades.

 

[Niraj Kumar]

ADO BUS 's running on the street also has 4 tires in it. This mean they are copying the design of other bus. Other Companies should claim the ownership of all the busses by that bus company. I don't understand how just on the basis of similar logo design WIPO made poor judgement. Mathematically speaking ,price of LLL.com quoted by Francois ($500k )is much less when compared to price for LLLL.com quoted by him.

 

[NoBS]

This is an explicit argument in favor of ADO winning this case. You’re basically admitting that the domain’s value stems solely from the brand ADO has built up over decades.

I research each inquiry and find every possible buyer and price it according to the most significant one. Or if that buyer is not using the brand to a good potential, I'll imagine a future best use case and price accordingly. There's no other way about it, domain investing would otherwise cease to exist.

Buyer pays what I say.

Can't afford the .com? Get a .net, or get a .top.

 

[Kate]

I don't understand how just on the basis of similar logo design WIPO made poor judgement.

Because the TM issue was compounded by a copyright issue. The small things add up and when put together can amount to a pattern a bad faith.
= panel thinking, not mine

That case is a stretch to me. The only case I have in mind that is 'stretchier' would be lh.com which amounts to daylight robbery. I am wondering if the panelists sometimes consider the big sums of money that respondents invest in their assets, and put that good faith investment in the balance of arguments.
Somebody who spends 5 figures on a domain normally has a business plan, and did not have cybersquatting in mind. But it can happen though - remember the clown who blew over 100K on toyota.me porsche.me etc back in 2008.

At least François did everything he could to get the best possible odds of prevailing, Zak has a good track record in domain disputes. But he can still escalate to court.

 

[wwwulff]

Carrillo sues bus company after bad UDRP decision:

https://domainnamewire.com/2018/02/13/much-ado-ado-com-carrillo-sues-bus-company-bad-udrp-decision/

 

[Joe70]

That lawsuit is a joke. If Carrillo claims he’d never heard of ADO, he’ll get laughed out of court.