ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    How to Reverse-Hijack a Generic Domain Name | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 36 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: How to Reverse-Hijack a Generic Domain Name
    by Anonymous on Monday June 10 2002, @11:46PM (#7063)
    Paint.biz is truely one of the worst decisions to come out in a while. Paint is so obviously a generic term that the panel must have been asleep when it read the decision. Oh but wait, soon we'll see decisions on Andrew.biz, Spy.biz, Hemp.biz and many more.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: How to Reverse-Hijack a Generic Domain Name
    by Anonymous on Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:08AM (#7064)
    Its quite clear that the retired judge who handled this case has "his head in the clouds".

    If an entity has a trademark on "paint.biz" then they should be entitled to register "paintbiz.biz" but not "paint.biz" . they have no trademark on the descriptor "paint".

    Clearly, its time for WIPO to develop a "continuing education" program for these judges and this guy needs to be the first one to enroll.

    Hello.................
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: How to Reverse-Hijack a Generic Domain Name
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:31AM (#7067)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    I suggest the guy take them the Courts under the ACPA.

    Some of these Panelists should be sent back to college or somewhere else appropriate for them.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Wash out for those fish - their mine!!!
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:38AM (#7069)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    Anyone registerd FISHING.NET ? You have? Watch out, someone might claim your Net is theirs... A very, very fishy business indeed really.

    What a load of crap in recent UDRP Decisions. Where on earth is an Appeals or Review Procedure within the so-called Arbitration system? No where. Why? Because it doesn't suit trademark holders. They don't want decisions overturned or reversed. They like it the way it is. Unfair.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: How to Reverse-Hijack a Generic Domain Name
    by Anonymous on Tuesday June 11 2002, @04:05AM (#7070)
    the whole let me see how ugly it is for people to conduct their business. The complainants, the panelists, lawyers, WIPO, or the respondents.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Let's keep this to a discussion of Paint.biz p
    by Anonymous on Tuesday June 11 2002, @05:57AM (#7077)
    Dan, thanks for highlighting the crappy paint.biz decision. How about some comments from the players in that case (rather than the same ol' rehash from some other poster kids on this board).
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: How to Reverse-Hijack a Generic Domain Name
    by Anonymous on Tuesday June 11 2002, @08:38AM (#7089)
    The problem with the dispute policy is that the policy is disputable.
    When a complainant submits its complaint, it's not responsible for the accuracy of the information it submits. That will create some loophole for some to make evidence in order to win the case.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: How to Reverse-Hijack a Generic Domain Name
    by Anonymous on Wednesday June 12 2002, @03:21AM (#7105)
    This is the most pathetic decision I have read for a while now, and completely flies in the face of most other arbitration cases.

    First, as one poster mentioned, if the mark was identical to the domain, then the domain that they have rights to should have been paintbiz.biz or paintdotbiz.biz. Certainly for the .info domains, Afilias stipulated that a sunrise name had to be identical to the trademark in its entirety. So example.info would only be qualified for registering exampleinfo.info (as periods were allowed to be omitted) or example-info.info.

    Second, it is impossible that the challenger (trademark owner) had prior use of the *domain* paint.biz as the respondent was the very first person to register it.

    These arbitrators need to read their peers' past decisions before they start to take domain law into their own hands.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: How to Reverse-Hijack a Generic Domain Name
    by Anonymous on Wednesday June 12 2002, @03:54AM (#7106)
    If this decision was correct, then new rollouts of TLDs are completely screwed. The craftier people wouldn't bother competing with the scores of others trying to get the top names. They'd just register the domains they want as trademarks first and then snatch them from the rightful owner after the landrush.

    This is clearly a screwed up decision.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Another bad decision
    by dtobias (dan@tobias.name) on Wednesday June 12 2002, @05:48AM (#7113)
    User #2967 Info | http://domains.dan.info/
    The .biz startup decisions that hand over generic words to trademark owners keep on coming... the latest gives about.biz to the owner of about.com. So why have new TLDs at all if they're just gonna do this?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com