News
Ethereum Name Service might pay $300k to resolve eth.link dispute
ENS Labs asks DAO about settlement offer and reimbursement for legal expenses.
Ethereum Name Service (ENS) has asked the ENS DAO to vote on a potential settlement over eth.link.
Eth.link is used as a resolving service for .eth names. People can type a second level .eth name followed by eth.link to get the name to resolve in their browser.
The person who registered the domain went to prison for helping North Korea evade sanctions and the domain expired while he was in prison.
The domain was registered at Uniregistry, which had an expired domain auction partnership with Dynadot. Dynadot auctioned the domain for $852,000, with Manifold Finance as the winning bidder.
Ethereum Name Service subsequently sued GoDaddy (which owns Uniregistry), Dynadot, and Manifold Finance. The domain was transferred to ENS due to a temporary injunction, but the case continues.
Manifold was dismissed from the case due to a lack of jurisdiction, but might still have a claim on the domain. The company has now offered to settle the dispute for a $300,000 payment.
ENS Labs is putting the settlement offer out to the ENS DAO. It is also asking the DAO to reimburse its legal expenses to date, which total about $750,000.
Given the legal expenses incurred to date and likely future expenditures, the settlement seems to be a bargain for ENS, assuming that the other parties also agree to the settlement and don’t demand their legal expenses to be reimbursed.
It appears that ENS Labs wants to avoid further legal expenses. It says that if the DAO refuses to reimburse it for its legal expenses, “ENS labs will act to minimise its further expenses by having the case dismissed.”
A settlement would also be helpful because ENS would no longer be entangled in a lawsuit with GoDaddy. Despite the lawsuit, GoDaddy worked with ENS to integrate its new gassless wallet connection into the GoDaddy registrar.
Post link: Ethereum Name Service might pay $300k to resolve eth.link dispute
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
WIPO UDRP panelist Richard Lyon passes away
Lyon contributed significantly to UDRP jurisprudence and wasn’t afraid to call out bad complaints.
Richard Grant Lyon – photo sourceA prolific UDRP panelist has passed away.
Richard Grant Lyon was one of the original UDRP panelists and contributed significantly to its jurisprudence.
He started deciding cases back in 2000 and heard hundreds of UDRP cases through the World Intellectual Property Organisation.
UDRP research site UDRP.tools tallies his total caseload at 325.
I wrote about Lyon’s decisions frequently, partly because he wasn’t afraid to deny cybersquatting claims and find reverse domain name hijacking.
In a dispute over ClearWaterSystems .net, Lyon found in favor of the respondent and pointed out flaws in another panelist’s rulings in a similar case.
He found reverse domain name hijacking on some valuable domain names, including GrandStrand.com, Circus.com, and Reza.com.
In a case over reveel.com, Lyon found reverse domain name hijacking when the other two panelists declined to consider it because it wasn’t explicitly requested.
Similarly, in a case over QLP.com, Lyon was the only panelist to find reverse domain name hijacking. He wrote:
We owe it to this Respondent to chastise the Complainant and its representative for their irresponsible conduct. We owe it to the integrity of the UDRP process to call out patent abuses such as I believe this case to be.
UDRP.tools shows that, when hearing cases individually, Lyon ordered 144 domains transferred but denied a whopping 76 cases. When part of a three-member panel, the panel only transferred about a quarter of the 99 cases.
It appears that Lyon’s last case was decided in May of 2023. He was assigned to a case on December 27 last year but had passed away just days before on December 22.
Lyon graduated from Haverford College and got his law degree from Harvard. He started practicing law at Sullivan & Cromwell, and later became General Counsel and Secretary of Ericsson before working for a couple of other law firms.
Lyon was 77.
Post link: WIPO UDRP panelist Richard Lyon passes away
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
End user domain sales: padel, video games, AI and more
An AI site for teachers, a VR video game publisher, and a padel tour bought domain names.
Sedo’s top sale this past week was GameGenie.com for $65,000. There’s a legacy site on the domain, and I’m unsure if the buyer intends to expand upon the existing site or start a new one. If you grew up in the 80s or 90s, you’ll appreciate the nostalgia of this site. Visit it before it disappears.
Here’s a list of end user domain name sales that just completed at Sedo. You can view previous lists like this here.
Reiseversicherung.at €12,600 – This domain, which is German for Travel Insurance, forwards to the website of travel insurance company Nexible.
TeachMate.com $5,750 – This is an interesting one to consider. The company uses the domain TeachMateAI.com and bought the shorter version. Think about this when you see companies using CompanyNameAI .com domains. As for TeachMate’s business, it helps teachers with their tasks like lesson planning. Cool idea.
MPGA.com €5,000 – MPGA Battery, a battery manufacturer, bought this domain and forwards it to its longer domain MPGAbattery.com.
MoneyFund.com $5,000 – The buyer is creating a website that’s still a work in progress. It’s clear it’s about money, but other than that, we’ll have to wait and see.
GridRunner.com €4,000 – GridRunner is a VR video game.
HDC.net $3,750 – HDC is a web development firm.
Grillpfannen.de €2,990 – This domain, which is German for Grill Pans, forwards to the website for Bratpfanne.
SmartProcure.de €2,950 – E-procurement company Cosinex bought this domain name.
Kehrwieder.de €2,900 – This domain forwards to Kehrwieder-verlag.de. The company publishes a newspaper in the Hildesheim/Vorharz region of Germany.
MyPadel.de €2,750 – Padel is a lot like pickleball, but with walls you can hit the ball off of, and it’s trendy outside the US. This domain forwards to padel-tour.de, which promotes a padel tour in Germany.
Outermind.com $2,500 – Tavish Calico bought this domain. If I’ve found the right guy, he runs a branding agency, so this could be for a client. This seems like a good value for the domain.
ADMK.com $2,500 – ADMK is a digital publishing company.
BrownMedia.com $2,000 – Brown Media is a video production firm.
Post link: End user domain sales: padel, video games, AI and more
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
GoDaddy reports strong Aftermarket growth in Q4
NameFind Auction and one-off sale help aftermarket revenue jump 14%.
GoDaddy (NYSE: GDDY) reported Q4 2023 and full-year 2023 earnings after the market closed today.
For Q4 2023, revenue came in at $1.100 billion, up 6% from the same quarter a year ago. Free cash flow totaled $0.305 billion, up 51% year over year.
For the full year, revenue increased 4% to $4.254 billion. Free cash flow grew 12% to $1.084 billion.
GoDaddy’s Application & Commerce segment posted 13% year-over-year revenue growth in Q4. The Core Platform segment, which includes legacy hosting and the domain name business, returned to growth with a 2% lift year over year.
Core Platform was helped by the domain aftermarket in Q4. Aftermarket revenue jumped 14% from $104 million in Q4 2022 to $118 million in Q4 2023.
Some increase was expected after GoDaddy auctioned domains from its NameFind portfolio and sold some great domains in another transaction. It’s unclear what percentage of the growth was from these two one-off activities, and GoDaddy also noted that Q4 2022 was a soft comparison quarter. That said, this puts GoDaddy on a bit of a hamster wheel next year — it may need to do more sales promotions like these to get the same results.
For the year, the Aftermarket dropped from $438 million in 2022 to $437 million in 2023.
The company also disclosed average aftermarket transaction prices. This number grew from $112 in 2020 to $191 in 2021, then $218 in 2022 and $217 last year. This combines a lot of aftermarket activity, presumably including expired domain auctions.
GoDaddy also discussed how it plans to grow margins, including by “expanding access to global talent,” a euphemism for outsourcing certain activities overseas.
Post link: GoDaddy reports strong Aftermarket growth in Q4
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Judge gives TRX.com owner a win in court battle
The judge doesn’t buy the plaintiff’s argument, but gives it one last chance.
A judge overseeing a cybersquatting lawsuit over trx.com has given the domain owner a partial victory.
The story is a bit complicated, so let’s rewind a bit.
BackgroundLoo Tze Ming bought the domain name trx.com for $138,000 in April 2022 at domain marketplace 4.cn.
In October 2022, Fitness Anywhere LLC, a company going through bankruptcy that claimed rights in TRX, filed a cybersquatting claim under UDRP. The following month, the panelist awarded the Complainant the domain name in a controversial decision.
Ming overlooked the dispute notice and didn’t respond, so he sued Fitness Anywhere in Arizona to stay the transfer.
Then, in February 2023, a company called JFXD TRX ACQ LLC, which described Fitness Anywhere as its predecessor in interest, filed an in rem lawsuit against trx.com in Virginia, where the .com registry is based.
Given the ongoing suit in Arizona, it was odd that JFXD TRX filed an in rem suit against the domain name because it knew who the domain owner was and how to contact him.
Ming successfully petitioned the court to move the in rem case to Arizona, where he filed his original lawsuit.
Moving the case was key because Arizona is in the Ninth Circuit. There’s precedent in the Ninth Circuit that the original registration date of a domain is the relevant date for a case under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA).
Trx.com was registered in 1999. The plaintiff got trademark rights in the second-level domain term TRX sometime after that, and then Ming bought the domain years after the trademark was established. However, according to the Ninth Circuit, because the original registration in 1999 predated the plaintiff’s trademark rights, the plaintiff can’t win.
The judge demands clarificationIn January, the judge overseeing the case asked JFXD TRX to explain a couple of things.
First, she asked how, under Ninth Circuit precedent, a domain registered in 1999 before it got trademark rights violates the ACPA.
Second, she asked for clarification on the relationship between Fitness Anywhere and JFXD TRX.
The relationship between the parties is interesting. The plaintiff’s lawyer, Alain Villeneuve, has represented both Fitness Anywhere and JFXD TRX. But there’s confusion about which entity owned the trademarks and at what time. The judge wrote (emphasis mine):
The filings in this case, as well as the filings in the case pending before Judge Logan [the case Ming filed to stay the UDRP transfer], show some confusion regarding the current owner of the TRX-related property and the proper defendant for Ming’s challenge to the order transferring trx.com. According to statements made by Mr. Villeneuve, Fitness Anywhere owned all TRX-related property, including the TRX trademarks, until it sold that property to JFXD in August 2022. Despite no longer owning any TRX-related property, in October 2022 Mr. Villeneuve initiated a domain name dispute proceeding on behalf of Fitness Anywhere. During those proceedings Mr. Villeneuve stated Fitness Anywhere was “the owner of the famous trademark TRX.” That administrative proceeding resulted in an order that trx.com be transferred to Fitness Anywhere. If Fitness Anywhere no longer owned the TRX-related property prior to the administrative proceeding, it would appear the transfer order was improper. If, however, Fitness Anywhere did own the property and continued to own the property, Ming’s claims against Fitness Anywhere pending before Judge Logan are the proper avenue for resolving ownership of trx.com. In that situation, however, JFXD’s current complaint is improper because JFXD does not own the TRX-related property. In explaining why its complaint does not state a claim for relief, JFXD must explain the conflicting positions adopted by Mr. Villeneuve. In particular, JFXD must explain whether Fitness Anywhere owned any TRX-related property at the time Mr. Villenueve stated Fitness Anywhere “is the owner of the famous trademark TRX.”
JFXD TRX’s responseJFXD TRX twisted itself into knots trying to explain (pdf) how the 2022 sale of the domain trx.com is a new registration and thus should be considered cybersquatting.
Frankly, its arguments are incoherent in many places. Many of the sentences are missing words. It conflates a registrar selling a domain with a marketplace brokering a domain. It makes a strange argument about the domain “falling to the public domain.” And it says that the value of .com domains is “plummeting” because there are other top-level domains available, which makes one wonder why it’s so important that the company get the .com domain.
It seems that the plaintiff is arguing that the original registration expired and Ming subsequently registered the domain. But the plaintiff doesn’t spell out how this happened (perhaps because it didn’t.)
I’m not the only person confused by the response.
The judge noted, “The Court cannot understand large portions of Plaintiff’s response and it is not clear whether this is, in fact, Plaintiff’s argument [that the domain expired and was subsequently registered]. Liberally construed, however, Plaintiff is arguing the registration of trx.com expired on some date after the TRX trademark purportedly owned by Plaintiff came into existence.”
The Plaintiff’s response shows an incredible lack of understanding of the domain name system. Consider this argument:
FURTHER EVIDENCE A REGISTRAR OWNS THIS URL
Mid 2022, Plaintiff looked if the URL was available for $19.99 on GoDaddy®. It was not. GoDaddy LLC offered a paid broker service for $69.99. Plaintiff gladly paid. What happened next is worthy of a fiction book. Within the hour, an excited private agent called saying he was from the GoDaddy brokerage. There was a smell of money in the air, the same vibe as entering a used car showroom. The GoDaddy [sic] refused to contact the owner to simply see if it was willing to sell. The WHOIS had listed “au tuu” from Iceland and Plaintiff’s previous efforts never worked. The agent was forceful and explained the URL was “worth millions” and tried to bully Plaintiff in giving an initial seven number initial offer. Plaintiff, pushed back saying a broker should not have an incentive to raise prices and online tools priced this, at most, in the mid five figures. The exchanges were so forceful, Plaintiff reported the misconduct to GoDaddy LLC who then magically assigned a new broker. The second agent was in shock and did not know who the first agent was and what had happened.
So, the plaintiff hired a registrar’s domain buying service that charges a fixed fee plus a commission. And it was surprised when the broker got excited?
It sounds like a boring fiction book to me.
In its response, the plaintiff simply ignored the judge’s request that it explain the relationship between Fitness Anywhere and JFXD TRX and who owns the intellectual property.
The judge rules in favor of MingYesterday, the judge in the case issued (pdf) an order in favor of Ming. He said the plaintiff could file an amended complaint if it could somehow show that the domain expired and was registered anew by Ming.
But the judge said that any such filing can’t ignore the question he asked earlier about what’s going on with the entities in this case. The response is important because it could show that the Complainant in the UDRP didn’t actually have the trademark rights it claimed.
Post link: Judge gives TRX.com owner a win in court battle
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Actual domain investor results – DNW Podcast #473
Listen to how two domain investors performed in 2023.
Once a year, domain investors Mark Levin and Logan Flatt join me on the show to discuss their sales results from the previous year.
On today’s show, you’ll learn how many domains they sold in 2023 compared to 2022, a breakdown of which top level domains they sold, how they are acquiring domain names, and what they are trying differently in 2024 to try to improve their results.
Also: Mar-a-Lago, .com price increase, Epik’s owner, Namecheap v. ICANN, GPT.
Sponsor: Sav.com backorders
Subscribe via Apple Podcasts to listen to the Domain Name Wire podcast on your iPhone, or click play above or download to begin listening. (Listen to previous podcasts here.)
Post link: Actual domain investor results – DNW Podcast #473
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Watch the 2024 Squarespace Super Bowl Commercial
Even aliens can’t get our attention without a website.
Squarespace (NYSE: SQSP) has been a regular fixture in the Super Bowl for many years now.
The company, which is one of the largest website builders and now (thanks to its acquisition of Google Domains) one of the largest domain name registrars, returns to today’s game with “Hello Down There.”
It’s the company’s tenth Super Bowl ad.
The commercial depicts aliens arriving on Earth, but no one is paying attention because they’re visiting websites on their phones and laptops. To get human attention, the aliens need to create a website.
Squarespace has a clever tagline: A website makes it real.
The 30-second commercial directed by Martin Scorsese might be a bit difficult to follow. But there’s a longer cut that is not restricted by the $7 million Super Bowl ad rate. I’ve embedded the full version below.
Post link: Watch the 2024 Squarespace Super Bowl Commercial
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
China sinks Verisign’s domain base in Q4
But price hikes help the company post solid financials.
Verisign (NASDAQ: VRSN) reported earnings yesterday and, once again, blamed China for a drop in domain name registrations.
The company had 9.0 million new .com and .net registrations during the quarter. That’s down from 9.7 million in the same quarter a year ago and 9.9 million in Q3 2023.
The overall base of .com and .net domains sunk 1.2 million names during the quarter, landing at 172.7 million. That’s also down from 173.8 million domains at the end of 2023.
Peeling back the curtain, the reason for the drop was a significant decline in China. The company lost 2.2 million domains under management there during 2023. So, without that precipitous fall, Verisign would have shown growth in the domain base last year.
Looking ahead to 2024, the company expects the domain base to shrink by as many as 1.0 million domains or grow by as many as 1.0 million.
You don’t need to cry for Verisign, though. Revenue increased to $1.49 billion, and the company pulled in $1.0 billion of operating income, or more than $1 million per employee.
Post link: China sinks Verisign’s domain base in Q4
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Verisign announces .com price hike to $10.26
.Com domains will cost $10.26 plus markup beginning in September.
Verisign (NASDAQ: VRSN) today announced that it is raising the wholesale price of .com domain names on September 1, 2024.
The registry currently charges registrars $9.59 per year for .com registrations. That will increase to $10.26.
Verisign is allowed to increase prices by 7% in each of the last four years of its six-year contract renewal. This year marks the final of those four years for the current contract. So, unless the U.S. government intervenes, the price should be fixed at $10.26 for the next couple of years.
Current registrants of .com domain names can avoid the price increase by renewing their domains in advance for up to ten years at today’s prices.
Verisign announced the hike in conjunction with its 2023 earnings results. The company reported revenue of $1.49 billion for 2023. While the number of domains under management fell over the course of the year, a 7% price increase instituted in September 2023 helped nudge revenue up 4.8% year over year.
Post link: Verisign announces .com price hike to $10.26
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Unstoppable Domains wins partial motion to dismiss in .wallet lawsuit
Judge agrees to dismiss two of three claims.
Blockchain naming platform Unstoppable Domains has convinced a judge to dismiss two claims brought against it by the owner of the .wallet domain in Handshake.
Unstoppable Domains sued Gateway Registry in 2022 after Gateway started offering second level registrations in the Handshake .wallet name. Unstoppable offers a rival .wallet blockchain name.
Gateway was selling domains on behalf of Handshake .wallet registrant Scott Florsck. Gateway shut down shortly after the lawsuit was filed.
Unstoppable and Florsck then filed lawsuits against each other (within about an hour) on September 21, 2022. About a year later, Unstoppable dropped its suit against Florsck, but Florsck retained his suit.
In his suit, Florsck asks for a declaratory judgment that he isn’t infringing Unstoppable’s purported trademark rights. He also alleged that Unstoppable engaged in unfair competition under the Lanham Act and that it violated Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
Unstoppable asked the judge to dismiss the latter two claims, and Judge Colm F. Connolly issued an order today agreeing with Unstoppable.
In the decision (pdf), Connolly noted that Florsck based both of the claims on Unstoppable’s decision to file a lawsuit against Gateway. He wrote:
Unstoppable argues, and I agree, that these claims are barred by the Noerr-Pennington doctrine. That doctrine “provides broad immunity from liability to those who petition the government, including administrative agencies and courts, for redress of their grievances.”
The lawsuit will continue on the other count for declaratory judgment.
Post link: Unstoppable Domains wins partial motion to dismiss in .wallet lawsuit
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Intuit wins reverse domain name hijacking charge
App for runners tries to get domain registered well before it had trademark rights.
Financial software company Intuit has won a reverse domain name hijacking charge against RunSmart Online, LLC.
RunSmart Online, LLC filed a cybersquatting complaint against Intuit’s domain name RunSmart.com. It appears that RunSmart Online, LLC is a small business that uses the domain runsmartonline.com.
It makes sense that the company would desire the shorter domain runsmart.com. Unfortunately for it, Intuit registered the domain more than a decade before the Complainant started using the name.
It appears that RunSmart Online, LLC wasn’t represented by a lawyer, and it shows. This case was dead on arrival because it’s impossible to show that Intuit registered the domain to target a non-existent trademark.
Panelist David S. Safran had no problem finding that the case was filed in bad faith as an attempted reverse domain name hijacking.
Fenwick & West represented Intuit.
Post link: Intuit wins reverse domain name hijacking charge
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Viviendas Universales S.A.S. tries to reverse hijack viviendas.com
Domain owner registered the dictionary term before the company existed.
A World Intellectual Property Organization panel has ruled that home lending company Viviendas Universales S.A.S. tried to reverse domain name hijack viviendas.com.
Viviendas Universales S.A.S. failed to show any of the three elements necessary to win a case under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP).
The case was dead on arrival for a couple of reasons.
First, viviendas is a Spanish dictionary word that means housing or households.
Second, the domain owner registered the domain before Viviendas Universales S.A.S. existed, meaning it was impossible to show that the domain owner registered the domain to target the Complainant.
In finding reverse domain name hijacking, panelist Gerardo Saavedra wrote (translated from Spanish):
It appears that the Complainant, who had legal advice, attempted to opportunistically obtain the disputed domain name by any means, presenting baseless allegations that it knew or should have known would not succeed, thus harassing the Respondent, which leads this Expert to determine in this case an abuse of the administrative proceeding under the Policy by the Complainant.
Post link: Viviendas Universales S.A.S. tries to reverse hijack viviendas.com
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Trump loses another Mar-a-Lago domain name dispute
Trump tries to get MaraLago.com through cybersquatting claim with World Intellectual Property Organization.
Donald Trump’s organization has lost a second cybersquatting dispute against a Mar-a-Lago-related domain name.
Last year, the company lost a case filed with World Intellectual Property Organization against the domain name mar-a-lago.com.
In that case, the person who registered the domain name claimed he registered it at his mother’s suggestion after three family pets died. “Mar” was a dog named short after the Respondent’s first name, Marq. “A” represented “Alfred,” a duck that frequented the pond behind their home, named after Alfred Hitchcock. “Lago” was a nickname for “Lag”, a slow cat the family had rescued.
The same person registered the hyphenless version of the domain, maralago.com, but no longer owns it. So Trump filed a cybersquatting claim against that domain, which is now owned by VPN.com domain broker Michael Gargiulo.
Gargiulo argued that the wording “maralago” is descriptive, being comprised of dictionary terms that translate into “sea to lake” in several languages.
The panel determined that Trump’s organization couldn’t overcome Gargiulo’s arguments about the common meaning of the domain:
The Policy is not designed to adjudicate all types of disputes that relate in any way to domain names. Boku, Inc. v. Phuc To, WIPO Case No. D2023-1338. The Panel does not have the benefit of cross-examination of witnesses, disclosure of documents held by the parties, or the other instruments that are typically available to assist a court to resolve certain kinds of disputes. Id. Many of the Complainant’s assertions, through no fault of the Complainant, are conclusory.
The panel said that Trump might have better luck in the courts where cross examination is available. Trump certainly has a lot of experience in court lately.
Post link: Trump loses another Mar-a-Lago domain name dispute
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
USPTO refuses OpenAI’s GPT trademark application
GPT is a generic term for OpenAI’s technology, reviewer states.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has issued a final refusal to OpenAI for its GPT trademark registration application.
Registration was refused because “the applied mark merely describes a feature, function, or characteristic of applicant’s goods and services.”
GPT is a commonly used initialism for Generative Pre-trained Transformer, and the USPTO reviewer determined that this is descriptive of OpenAI’s services.
The refusal states:
The applicant’s identification shows that it is using the mark in connection with software goods and services using artificial intelligence, machine learning, and natural language processing and generation. Accordingly, consumer encountering the acronym “GPT” would immediately understand this to communicate a feature of the applicant’s software good and services which are “generative pre-trained transformers” or feature neural network models that “give applications the ability to create human-like text and content (images, music, and more), and answer questions in a conversational manner.
The examining attorney also noted that the application is not suited for the Supplemental Register because the term is generic for the applied-for services.
OpenAI can file an additional response or appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Many domain investors acquired domain names with GPT in them, and other AI-related services also use names with this term.
Although OpenAI’s application was refused, that doesn’t stop it from adding its own terms preventing people from using the GPT term if they wish to use OpenAI’s services as a backbone.
(Hat tip: @berryhillj)
Post link: USPTO refuses OpenAI’s GPT trademark application
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
11 of the latest end user domain name sales at Sedo
A metal staircase company, a nurse job site, and a site for buying video game accounts bought domain names.
Sedo had a handful of nice five figure sales this week, including CardPlus.com ($35,000), Astrophotography.com ($28,750), and Alexander.ch (EUR 22,500). I can’t tell who bought these domains yet, but I did find the buyers of some of the lower-priced domains.
Here’s a list of end user domain name sales that just completed at Sedo. You can view previous lists like this here.
Metallart.com $8,000 – This domain forwards to metallart-treppen.de. The company makes wicked cool metal stairs.
HappyNurse.com $7,995 – This domain forwards to nurse.ch, a jobs site for nurses.
Onsen.eu €5,000 – Onsen sells Osaka Air mattresses and orthopedic pillows in the Polish market.
e.pn $5,000 – EPN net issues virtual credit card numbers for ad spending. It’s designed for affiliate marketers.
Beddengoed.be €3,000 – Beddengoed is Dutch for bedding. Bedding site smulderstextiel.be acquired this domain and forwards it to its website using a tracking code to count the domain’s traffic.
SmithHeat.com $2,888 – Smith Mechanical Heating & Cooling in Michigan bought this domain. It looks like Mike Mann’s company was the seller.
Poopeys.com €2,700 – Poopeys sells diapers and other babycare products. It forwards this domain to its site at poopeys.de.
2dekansje.nl €2,500 – 2dekansje is a general merchandise retail site. It forwards this domain to 2dekansje.com.
MoneyManagementInternational.org $2,500 – Money Management International, a debt counseling group, forwards this domain to its site at MoneyManagement.org.
OGuser.com $2,500 – Flipd, formerly called OGuser, is a marketplace for selling video gaming accounts.
YesYouCan.fr €2,499 – This domain is forwarded to the site for N1 Markets, a European convenience store chain. I’m not sure what the connection is.
Post link: 11 of the latest end user domain name sales at Sedo
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
.Com rankings: Squarespace continues to fall, Gname surges
Squarespace registers fewer new .com domains, and Gname moves up the overall leaderboard.
Last month, I wrote about how new registrations at Google Domains plummeted after Squarespace (NYSE: SQSP) took over. I mentioned that a primary reason was likely the brand name.
I heard from several domain registrants who said their issue isn’t the brand. Instead, it’s the Squarespace registrar UI and feature set, and pricing.
These are both valid points. Squarespace is catching up to Google Domains’ functionality. And instead of charging $12 a year, it charges $12 only for the first year and $20 afterward. That’s a big turn-off and certainly impacts registrations.
I also heard from the company, which pointed out that it has more domains under management than the total leaderboard shows. Before becoming a registrar, Squarespace was a Tucows reseller. It has over 1 million .com domains at Tucows.
A lot of companies start as resellers and then get their own accreditations. It would be nearly impossible to calculate their numbers every month. Still, it’s worth noting that Squarespace has about one million more .com registrations with customers than the leaderboard shows.
ICANN just published data from .com registry Verisign showing new registrations at each registrar for October. Squarespace’s new registration numbers dropped a bit more compared to September. It will be interesting to see where it heads from here.
In another chart movement, Gname jumped its Asian rival Alibaba on the overall leaderboard. It had a huge month for new registrations, too.
Below is a chart showing how the largest registrars did in terms of new registrations in October. Note that the rankings include multiple registrar accreditations within families of registrars. You can see the list at the end of this post.
1. GoDaddy.com (NYSE: GDDY) 752,613 (715,431 in September 2023)
2. Namecheap Inc. 304,155 (283,620)
3. Gname.com 205,943 (133,917)
4. Newfold Digital 201,035 (216,538)
5. Tucows (NASDAQ: TCX) 170,236 (163,648)
6. Squarespace (NYSE: SQSP) 160,931 (189,713)
7. Alibaba 86,237 (71,895)
8. Hostinger 85,029
9. NameBright 78,621
10. Dynadot 78,357 (71,212)
Here’s the leaderboard of the top registrars in terms of total .com registrations under management as of the end of October.
1. GoDaddy 56,065,221 (56,142,674 in September 2023)
2. Newfold Digital 12,338,513 (12,380,044)
3. Tucows 11,076,704 (11,113,636)
4. Namecheap 9,428,909 (9,387,689)
5. Squarespace 8,173,894 (8,184,335)
6. TurnCommerce 5,949,178 (5,940,486)
7. IONOS# 5,689,842 (5,669,464)
8. Gname 4,374,509 (4,237,209)
9. Alibaba 4,153,986 (4,187,402)
10. CentralNic 3,769,801 (3,826,492)
Many domain companies have multiple accreditations, and I’ve tried to capture the largest ones. See the notes below.
- GoDaddy includes GoDaddy, Wild West Domains, Uniregistry, GoDaddy Corporate Domains, MeshDigital, the 5 “Go Country” registrars, and 123 Reg
- Namecheap includes Namecheap and Spaceship
- Tucows includes Tucows, Enom, Ascio and EPAG
- Newfold Digital Includes PDR, Domain.com, FastDomain, Bigrock, Network Solutions, Register.com, MarkMonitor, SnapNames registrars, and Crazy Domains/Dreamscape. There are other Newfold registrars, but these are the biggest.
- Squarespace includes Squarespace and Google
- TurnCommerce Includes NameBright and DropCatch registrars
- IONOS includes Includes 1&1, PSI, Cronon, United-Domains, Arsys, and world4you
- CentralNic includes Key-Systems, 1API, Internet.bs, TLD Registrar Solutions, RegistryGate, Moniker, Instra
Post link: .Com rankings: Squarespace continues to fall, Gname surges
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Namecheap sues ICANN over .org price caps
Registrar says ICANN hasn’t taken action after IRP ruling.
Over one year after winning a partial victory against ICANN over price caps, domain registrar Namecheap is asking a court to push ICANN into action.
Namecheap filed a complaint under the Independent Review Process (IRP) in 2020 to protest ICANN’s unilateral decision to remove price caps on .org and .info domain names.
The IRP panel found that ICANN did indeed violate its articles and bylaws. But ICANN claimed the IRP panel’s ruling provided merely recommendations, not requirements, for what the Board should do.
ICANN’s board asked its Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee (BAMC) to review the decision. In June 2023, the board agreed with the BAMC’s recommendation that hiring an economist to study the issue would be a good first step.
In its suit (pdf), Namecheap alleges nothing has happened since then.
It filed the suit in Los Angeles Superior Court, demanding an injunction against ICANN.
Post link: Namecheap sues ICANN over .org price caps
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Indian payments platform Innoviti tries reverse domain name hijacking
Innoviti’s argument about non-use was false.
A large payments company tried to reverse domain name hijack innoviti.com.co, a World Intellectual Property Organization panel has ruled.
Innoviti Technologies Private Limited, which uses the domain name innoviti.com, filed the dispute against Innoviti S.A.S., a Colombian technology company. (.Co is the country code for Colombia.)
Anyone visiting the domain name in question would see that the domain was being used by a legitimate business. Yet, the Complainant stated (pdf):
The Respondent is not using the Disputed Domain Name in connection with bona fide offering of goods or services. To the best of the Complainant’s knowledge (a) the Respondent is not conducting any meaningful business under the name and mark INNOVITI to warrant registration of the Disputed Domain Name in its name; and (b) the Respondent is not commonly known by the Disputed Domain Name. This establishes it beyond doubt that the Respondent has no legitimate rights and/or interests in the disputed domain name
This was enough for panelist Nick Gardner to consider reverse domain name hijacking even though the domain owner didn’t respond:
The Complaint contains the following certification “The Complainant certifies that the information contained in this Complaint is to the best of the Complainant’s knowledge complete and accurate, that this Complaint is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, and that the assertions in this Complaint are warranted under the Rules and under applicable law, as it now exists or as it may be extended by a good-faith and reasonable argument”.
The Panel does not see how that certification can properly have been given. As indicated above the Complaint is absolutely silent about the Respondent’s Website and contains no information of any kind (such page 5 as for example screenshots) about it. Instead, it says “The Respondent is not using the Disputed Domain Name in connection with bona fide offering of goods or services”. The Complainant or its representatives presumably must have visited the Respondent’s Website. The Panel notes that the Complaint contains this statement “The Disputed Domain Name gives an unmistakable impression as if the Disputed Domain Name has something to do with the Complainant and/or its services, which is certainly not the case. This is more so considering the fact that the Respondent claims to be engaged in technology related services”,] which would seem to confirm that the Respondent’s Website had been reviewed. Overall, the Panel regards the Complaint as highly misleading given the Respondent’s Website clearly relates to a bona fide business. Thus, for example the statement that “To the best of the Complainant’s knowledge (a) the Respondent is not conducting any meaningful business under the name and mark INNOVITI to warrant registration of the Disputed Domain Name in its name” was at best highly misleading and at worst simply untrue.
The Panel is unfortunately left with the distinct impression that the Complainant and/or its representatives will have been well aware that the Respondent’s Website indicated the Respondent was carrying out a bona fide business and chose not to tell the Panel that was the case. The Panel should be able to rely upon the certification given in the Complaint and deplores what appears to be an attempt to mislead the Panel. The only sanction available to the Panel is to make a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking and the Panel so finds.
The Complainant also gave the wrong date for registration of the domain.
Perhaps most amazing is that the Complainant went through the hassle of filing this case and didn’t bother to register the second level version of the domain, innoviti .co.
K&S Partners represented the Complainant.
Post link: Indian payments platform Innoviti tries reverse domain name hijacking
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Outbound domain sales – DNW Podcast #472
How one domain investor sold $300k of domains using outbound marketing.
Most domain investors are passive. They list their domains for sale on marketplaces, put up “for sale” landers, and wait for buyers to come to them.
A subset of investors do outbound marketing, contacting businesses that might be interested in buying their domains.
One such investor took this idea into overdrive recently. Ryan Ewen, founder of DomainManage.com, contacted 25,000 prospects and sold $300,000 of domain names.
On today’s show, Ryan explains how he did it and what he learned.
Also: Gasless ENS, Epik, Namecheap
Sponsor: Sav.com domain transfers
Subscribe via Apple Podcasts to listen to the Domain Name Wire podcast on your iPhone, or click play above or download to begin listening. (Listen to previous podcasts here.)
Post link: Outbound domain sales – DNW Podcast #472
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
Registered Agents Inc. indeed acquired Epik
Corporate formation business bought domain name registrar Epik.
When Epik was acquired in June of 2023, allegations in a lawsuit said that Registered Agents, Inc. was the buyer through a new entity called Epik LLC. And the asset purchase paperwork was signed by JM Spear, President of Registered Agents Inc.
Register Agents Inc. acts as the contact for companies so they don’t have to disclose their real information, kind of like how Whois privacy works. Typically, a registered agent would not sign an asset purchase agreement on behalf of a client.
But there was still an open question — did Registered Agents Inc. acquire Epik or was it someone else using Registered Agents Inc.?
According to a release on Epik’s site, the buyer was indeed Registered Agents Inc.
It makes sense. Registered Agents Inc. helps companies with formation services and even offers online identity packages. So, owning a domain registrar is complementary.
Epik’s website now lists three people associated with Registered Agents Inc. as the Epik leadership team.
It would seem that it’s case closed. But given the business that Registered Agents Inc. is in (including hiding identities), people will still have questions. Especially after the company’s bizarre behavior on social media recently.
Post link: Registered Agents Inc. indeed acquired Epik
© DomainNameWire.com 2023. This is copyrighted content. Domain Name Wire full-text RSS feeds are made available for personal use only, and may not be published on any site without permission. If you see this message on a website, contact editor (at) domainnamewire.com. Latest domain news at DNW.com: Domain Name Wire.
Related posts:Categories: Domains
