HOPEFULLY, an end to the discussion of CYBERSQUATTERS - GoFuckYourself.com

stangster · 10-26-2001, 02:16 PM

Has anyone ever been to http://www.nissan.com ?

Well, it's not where you think it's gonna take you.

UNLESS the your site's name is trademarked.. AND the site in question has a product or service similar to yours, you got diddilly squat for a say.

In that case, it's definitely a snooze/lose situation.

I don't know how the heck thehun has gotten soo many people to hand over domains that are similar in name. I'm assuming that it's cause they had sites similar to thehuns.

BUT people, you can't copyright names.

If thumbzillas.com was a site about indexed thumbs of godzilla movies, thumbzilla the porn site has no ground to stand on.

Go ahead and ask Nissan Motor Co.

Amputate Your Head · 10-26-2001, 02:20 PM

I thought I already brought that up, but yes... without a nice little piece of legal trademark paper... you can pretty much bend over and spread 'em.

stangster · 10-26-2001, 02:24 PM

hey Amp - http://www.amputateyourhead.com is available!

Amputate Your Head · 10-26-2001, 02:26 PM

hehe..... what the hell would I do with a domain name like that though...

stangster · 10-26-2001, 02:29 PM

It could be a killer fetish site..?

hmmm..

wait a minute..I'll be back!

-=HUNGRYMAN=- · 10-26-2001, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by stangster:
It could be a killer fetish site..?

hmmm..

wait a minute..I'll be back!

FUCK !!!
buy it Amp !!

Use this guy's business model ... it will make you rich !!!
www.cutoffmyfeet.com

------------------

Airforce come and dey flatten your home !!!
The Black Sheep of the Boneprone Family
I like to rub HERTURN on my nipples

rhizome · 10-26-2001, 02:38 PM

Stangster, the nissan case is completely different than the thumbzilla one. In order for thumbzilla.com to win against thumbzillas.com, Zilla only needs to prove three things:

<<
(i) The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a mark in which complainants have rights, and

(ii) Respondents have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name, and

(iii) The domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
>>

Nissan cars can prove the first but not the last two. Thumbzilla can easily prove all 3. For a very similar case to thumbzilla one, just look at some of the names Nordstrom has won back: http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/deci...2001-0418.html

And in particular note this part:
"The addition of prefixes -- such as meaningless numbers, and the substitution of one letter for another -- especially when they are adjacent on a keyboard, do not detract from "identity" as that term has been construed in connection with Policy Paragraph 4(a)(i). E.g. CBS Broadcasting v. Sale?s, WIPO D2000-0255, Yahoo! Inc. v. David Ashby, WIPO D2000-0241, PACCAR v. Enyart Associates, WIPO D2000-0289. Even if there were no such identity, it is apparent that each domain name in issue is confusingly similar to the trademark and service mark NORDSTROM."

And WIPO agreed with Nordstrom on this point.

[This message has been edited by rhizome (edited 10-26-2001).]

stangster · 10-26-2001, 02:53 PM

Rhizome:

Quote:

Originally posted by stangster:
If thumbzillas.com was a site about indexed thumbs of godzilla movies, thumbzilla the porn site has no ground to stand on.

boneprone · 10-26-2001, 02:55 PM

lets go back to my thread and talk about this should we?

also there are other important topics on my thread like what should I eat.

Well what should I ?

Dim Sum? Or Whoper?

stangster · 10-26-2001, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by boneprone:
Whoper

I thought the Jack's landlord was Roper?

hmmm.

rhizome · 10-26-2001, 03:13 PM

I should have made it clear what my post above was primarily responding to. It is the below quote that it is not entirely accurate:

Quote:

Originally posted by stangster:
If thumbzillas.com was a site about indexed thumbs of godzilla movies, thumbzilla the porn site has no ground to stand on.

1) It is without question that in the above case thumbzillas.com is "cunfusingly similar" to thumbzilla.com

2) If thumbzillas.com had been around for a while, trademarked the name and has been know by that distinct name for a while, thumbzilla.com probably wouldn't have a case just as nissan cars doesn't have a case. However, if thumbzillas.com had just popped up recently, was not a registered business but someone who was just running a fansite, I would say they would not have a sufficient interest in the name. Of course there is more to this like whether the person has a history of cybersquatting, has ever offered the domain for sale, etc.

3) Did thumbzillas.com register the name in good faith. If it can be proven that they registered it to leech the traffic from thumbzilla.com, then of course they didn't register it in good faith.

The point of all this is that it is very unlikely that anyone today could register a name like thumbzillas.com in good faith and/or prove that they have a legitimate interest in that specific name and have become known by it. That's why thehun always gets his names back and that's why if anyone like thumbzilla took the guy who registered all those typos in the other thread to WIPO, he would win EVEN if thumbzillas.com was just a search page or redirected to Disney or had a few thumbs from the movie Godzilla.

On-top · 10-26-2001, 03:19 PM

Burger King, man. I tried to tell you yesterday.

stangster · 10-26-2001, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rhizome:
The point of all this is that it is very unlikely that anyone today could register a name like thumbzillas.com in good faith and/or prove that they have a legitimate interest in that specific name and have become known by it.

Ask the californiastatelottery.com about what they WISH they could do to californialottery.com(gambling ads in search format)

It's just a matter of standing your ground people. Hire a fuckin lawyer.

10-26-2001, 02:16 PM	#1
stangster Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: SoCal Posts: 1,126	HOPEFULLY, an end to the discussion of CYBERSQUATTERS Has anyone ever been to http://www.nissan.com ? Well, it's not where you think it's gonna take you. UNLESS the your site's name is trademarked.. AND the site in question has a product or service similar to yours, you got diddilly squat for a say. In that case, it's definitely a snooze/lose situation. I don't know how the heck thehun has gotten soo many people to hand over domains that are similar in name. I'm assuming that it's cause they had sites similar to thehuns. BUT people, you can't copyright names. If thumbzillas.com was a site about indexed thumbs of godzilla movies, thumbzilla the porn site has no ground to stand on. Go ahead and ask Nissan Motor Co.

10-26-2001, 02:20 PM	#2
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	I thought I already brought that up, but yes... without a nice little piece of legal trademark paper... you can pretty much bend over and spread 'em.

10-26-2001, 02:24 PM	#3
stangster Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: SoCal Posts: 1,126	hey Amp - http://www.amputateyourhead.com is available!

10-26-2001, 02:26 PM	#4
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	hehe..... what the hell would I do with a domain name like that though...

10-26-2001, 02:29 PM	#5
stangster Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: SoCal Posts: 1,126	It could be a killer fetish site..? hmmm.. wait a minute..I'll be back!

10-26-2001, 02:38 PM	#7
rhizome Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 788	Stangster, the nissan case is completely different than the thumbzilla one. In order for thumbzilla.com to win against thumbzillas.com, Zilla only needs to prove three things: << (i) The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a mark in which complainants have rights, and (ii) Respondents have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name, and (iii) The domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. >> Nissan cars can prove the first but not the last two. Thumbzilla can easily prove all 3. For a very similar case to thumbzilla one, just look at some of the names Nordstrom has won back: http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/deci...2001-0418.html And in particular note this part: "The addition of prefixes -- such as meaningless numbers, and the substitution of one letter for another -- especially when they are adjacent on a keyboard, do not detract from "identity" as that term has been construed in connection with Policy Paragraph 4(a)(i). E.g. CBS Broadcasting v. Sale?s, WIPO D2000-0255, Yahoo! Inc. v. David Ashby, WIPO D2000-0241, PACCAR v. Enyart Associates, WIPO D2000-0289. Even if there were no such identity, it is apparent that each domain name in issue is confusingly similar to the trademark and service mark NORDSTROM." And WIPO agreed with Nordstrom on this point. [This message has been edited by rhizome (edited 10-26-2001).]

10-26-2001, 02:55 PM	#9
boneprone Hall Of Fame Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Portland Oregon USA Posts: 34,415	lets go back to my thread and talk about this should we? also there are other important topics on my thread like what should I eat. Well what should I ? Dim Sum? Or Whoper?

10-26-2001, 03:19 PM	#12
On-top Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: IN Posts: 2,283	Burger King, man. I tried to tell you yesterday.