Twitter

[Lee]

Not sure why anyone would reg this domain, pointless in fact!

No real value, just a waste of a reg fee IMHO and a potential headache in the future. Life is hard enough without making it even more so!

Good luck to the new owner!

 

[Jeff]

Wish we could make a poll and have people bet on various tags that might find themselves with it @dn @adm pretty please?

It dropped 27 minutes before your post, so you're a bit late. Congratulations @ukbackorder. I've never heard of Imageo, but have my doubts about some of the other domains in their portfolio. Bedsores.co.uk?

I don't think it matters too much, it'll be an abusive registration in anyone's hands but Twitter/X - DRS have made decisions for cases like these before.

Comparable DRS examples? It's a dictionary word that dates back to the 14th century according to the OED.

 

[ben]

I highly doubt Twitter care about it, but I do think they should register every single domain name they can with their brand name, even if it’s a legacy name.

 

[Hook]

Comparable DRS examples? It's a dictionary word that dates back to the 14th century according to the OED.

The dictionary definition would be used in the test, on a balance of probability. The test is:

Complaint has to prove, on a balance of probabilities that:
i. it has rights in respect of a name or mark identical or similar to the domain name; and
ii. the domain name, in the hands of the respondent, is an abusive registration.

DRS decisions are unique to each other based solely on the facts, and don't hold precedents like the civil legal system - so let's wait and see. X has the kinda budget where they don't need to waste time with DRS, the could just swamp you in an actual court.

But I couldn't find one which was just a dictionary word, so will be interesting to see if it does go through DRS. I think the fact that words like "tweet" are in the dictionary only help X's case.

 

[ben]

I think Nominet should have responsibility as a registrar to prevent trademarked names like this being re-sold/dropped. If the company doesn't want it, take it out of the zone file.

 

[Hook]

I highly doubt Twitter care about it, but I do think they should register every single domain name they can with their brand name, even if it’s a legacy name.

C&D will come through the second anything is hosted on that domain - so they don't really have to worry about much. I have a friend who works for an online brand protection business and the last thing they want to do is put money in the pockets of squatters/domain investors, they just wait for you potentially leave room for a complaint and take advantage. If you give them a discounted deal like £500 they'll take that rather than DRS, but if you want £1000s they'll usually role the dice

 

[Marek]

I think Nominet should have responsibility as a registrar to prevent trademarked names like this being re-sold/dropped. If the company doesn't want it, take it out of the zone file.

They can't.

Apple = a trademark for selling computers
Apple.co.uk selling fruit = completely fine

 

[Jeff]

But I couldn't find one which was just a dictionary word

Verbatim.co.uk - which went to appeal - is the one that seems to be frequently cited.

C&D will come through the second anything is hosted on that domain

Anyone can serve a C&D notice, but whether the recipient needs to take any notice is another matter.

Apple = a trademark for selling computers
Apple.co.uk selling fruit = completely fine

Exactly. I haven't checked the trademarks, but provided Twitter/X don't have one relating to birds and their songs, a website devoted to that subject with loads of aff links to related merchandise would be fine IMHO.

 

[Jeff]

Two words admittedly, but check out D00026728 (siestacoffee.co.uk) from earlier this month.

The respondent got an RDNH finding despite the complainant having a trademark!

 

[username]

Two words admittedly, but check out D00026728 (siestacoffee.co.uk) from earlier this month.

The respondent got an RDNH finding despite the complainant having a trademark!

I haven't seen it, but probably because the registration predates the trademark. That is certainly the definition of RDNH.

If you pretend that a registration was abusive when you didn't even exist yet at the point of domain name registration, you're reverse hijacking.

I can get a TM for anything within a month, but I can't go round claiming names that have already been registered.

 

[seemly]

Two words admittedly, but check out D00026728 (siestacoffee.co.uk) from earlier this month.

The respondent got an RDNH finding despite the complainant having a trademark!

I was reading one just yesterday, but I have zero clue on how I ended up there, or what started my on this particular rabbit hole.

But it was for RobotWars.co.uk (Denys). I've never even read one of these before, and I found it really interesting.

Edit: I just remembered why I even found it. I went to https://ostashko.com/ and saw the text in the top right of the screen which reads "Note to Google: this site must be #1 ranked for 'denys ostashko / денис осташко' searches, you silly robot ;)", so I just checked if Google complied, and it didn't (silly robot), but one of the top 10 results was that DRS.

 

[Hook]

Verbatim.co.uk - which went to appeal - is the one that seems to be frequently cited.


Anyone can serve a C&D notice, but whether the recipient needs to take any notice is another matter.


Exactly. I haven't checked the trademarks, but provided Twitter/X don't have one relating to birds and their songs, a website devoted to that subject with loads of aff links to related merchandise would be fine IMHO.

What makes you so sure X would even go down the DRS route? If you start hosting content on Twitter.uk, you can expect C&D and then end up in IPEC explaining how it is a good faith registration because of the dictionary definition, paying out of your own pocket of court.

I also think you are going to have a hard time denying that you didn't know of X's rights to the trademark and the name. And again, DRS has no precedency, so just because one case got decided one way for X reason, doesn't mean the next case has to follow that opinion.

These are all facts based - the "mens rea" plays a big part in these, so whoever ends up with the name will have to explain their case.

 

[Murray]

It dropped 27 minutes before your post, so you're a bit late. Congratulations @ukbackorder. I've never heard of Imageo, but have my doubts about some of the other domains in their portfolio. Bedsores.co.uk?


Comparable DRS examples? It's a dictionary word that dates back to the 14th century according to the OED.

It was caught by that tag for ukbackorder because more than one person (since it has gone to auction) prebid for it

 

[Jeff]

What makes you so sure X would even go down the DRS route? If you start hosting content on Twitter.uk, you can expect C&D and then end up in IPEC explaining how it is a good faith registration because of the dictionary definition, paying out of your own pocket of court.

I'm not sure, but I think a court would take a very dim view of a claimant rushing to litigate without first trying the long-established DRS route - especially the mediation part.

A court case would also attract much more publicity than a DRS. Assuming the name has been dropped by mistake, this is already embarrassing enough for Markmonitor and/or CSC Corporate Domains. Why would either of these brand protection companies want to advertise their abject failure to protect their client's brand by allowing this domain to drop?

Furthermore, what would be the cause of action? Passing off? Not if the new owner's site made it clear that it had nothing to do with Twitter/X. Infringement of trade marks? Again, not if the subject matter was unrelated to the classes covered by the trade marks (which I haven't checked).

So I don't think this is likely to end up in court.

I also think you are going to have a hard time denying that you didn't know of X's rights to the trademark and the name. And again, DRS has no precedency, so just because one case got decided one way for X reason, doesn't mean the next case has to follow that opinion.

These are all facts based - the "mens rea" plays a big part in these, so whoever ends up with the name will have to explain their case.

If it goes to DRS, I agree that anyone under the age of about 70 would have a job convincing the expert that they'd never heard of Twitter, but at the same time I think they could make a decent case that they reasonably believed X was no longer interested in the Twitter brand. Firstly because of all the fanfare surrounding the X rebrand, and secondly because they've allowed this domain to drop.

For all the above reasons I think the most likely outcome is that Markmonitor or CSC will quietly buy the the domain back, either in the current auction or later. A cynic might suggest that this was the new owner's intention all along...

BTW, another relevant DRS is D00015585 (mango.co.uk & mango.uk), another dictionary word where the complainant had multiple trade marks that pre-dated either domain's registration. Granted, Mango is nowhere near as well-known as Twitter, but other than that the circumstances are similar.

 

[Hook]

I'm not sure, but I think a court would take a very dim view of a claimant rushing to litigate without first trying the long-established DRS route - especially the mediation part.

A court case would also attract much more publicity than a DRS. Assuming the name has been dropped by mistake, this is already embarrassing enough for Markmonitor and/or CSC Corporate Domains. Why would either of these brand protection companies want to advertise their abject failure to protect their client's brand by allowing this domain to drop?

Furthermore, what would be the cause of action? Passing off? Not if the new owner's site made it clear that it had nothing to do with Twitter/X. Infringement of trade marks? Again, not if the subject matter was unrelated to the classes covered by the trade marks (which I haven't checked).

So I don't think this is likely to end up in court.

Firstly, a court would not take a dim view on a claimant not using mediation. There is not a single case to support this claim you have just made. However, if Twitter/X did go down the DRS route, and lost - they'd have no way to appeal this in DRS or Court. (Michael Toth v Emirates [2011] EWPCC 18)

However, if they decided to ignore the industry mediation, and go straight into a trademark dispute case, they would have access to appeals and the well established legal system of the England and Wales, which predates Nominet existence by a couple of centuries - so which is more "long-established"? Even the IPEC predates Nominet, let alone the DRS.

Also the court definition of bad faith is much wider than the DRS, you can be found to register a domain in bad faith by simply registering a domain, with knowledge of the trademark owners rights to the name, without a legitimate purpose. Much wider definition that DRS.

"BTW, another relevant DRS is D00015585 (mango.co.uk & mango.uk), another dictionary word where the complainant had multiple trade marks that pre-dated either domain's registration. Granted, Mango is nowhere near as well-known as Twitter, but other than that the circumstances are similar."

I would like to stress DRS doesn't have a precedency system, so this really doesn't necessarily prove anything, and Mango is not as well-known as Twitter - Twitter is one of the most recognisable brands WW. I also think the fact that Twitter.uk Also, I briefly read the facts of that DRS, Mango (company) never owned Mango.co.uk - pretty big, factual difference in the cases if so.

 

[Jeff]

Firstly, a court would not take a dim view on a claimant not using mediation. There is not a single case to support this claim you have just made.

https://ipo.blog.gov.uk/2015/02/20/lets-talk-a-mediators-tale/

However, if Twitter/X did go down the DRS route, and lost - they'd have no way to appeal this in DRS

Pardon??

or Court. (Michael Toth v Emirates [2011] EWPCC 18)

I'm not a lawyer, let alone an IP lawyer, but my (very quick) reading of this judgment is that it only prevents the DRS parties later going to court to reopen the issue of abusive registration. It doesn't prevent a claim on any other grounds.

Anyway, let's see where the domain ends up tomorrow evening, and a week, a month, a year from now.

 

[Hook]

https://ipo.blog.gov.uk/2015/02/20/lets-talk-a-mediators-tale/


Pardon??


I'm not a lawyer, let alone an IP lawyer, but my (very quick) reading of this judgment is that it only prevents the DRS parties later going to court to reopen the issue of abusive registration. It doesn't prevent a claim on any other grounds.

Anyway, let's see where the domain ends up tomorrow evening, and a week, a month, a year from now.

https://ipo.blog.gov.uk/2015/02/20/lets-talk-a-mediators-tale/ - this is the court appointed mediator, nothing to do with DRS.

"it only prevents the DRS parties later going to court to reopen the issue of abusive registration" - exactly, so once the DRS has decided that the registration is/is not abusive, neither party can reopen this issue in court - however, if you take it to court to decide if it is registered in bad faith, you can appeal the decision either way.

This doesn't prevent opening a case for other reasons, however aren't we just talking about the DRS and abusive registration? You can have a DRS and sue for other reasons, such as passing off - and you can also sue for bad faith registration, and also sue for passing off. The only appeal I was referring to was to a court to relitigate the DRS. I know you can appeal DRS, but that still isn't in a proper court, still the just the industry mediator, not court.

I have a law degree, but years ago now. So some bits might be brushed over but the point I was making - why waste your time with DRS, when you can use a court with a functioning appeals process. DRS is cheap sure, but I think it could go either way - when with using the actual legal system, you have a better chance of getting the result you want.

reading on the case (summary):

http://eip.com/downloads/eip_nominet_floodgates.pdf

 

[Jeff]

https://ipo.blog.gov.uk/2015/02/20/lets-talk-a-mediators-tale/ - this is the court appointed mediator, nothing to do with DRS.

Yes, of course, but the point I was making is that the courts are very keen (verging on insistent) that would-be litigants try mediation first, and mediation is baked into the DRS process.

the point I was making - why waste your time with DRS, when you can use a court with a functioning appeals process.

Because:
(1) The only remedy in a DRS is transfer (or occasionally cancellation or suspension), whereas IPEC might award damages and injunct some future use, but not order a transfer.
(2) A DRS is much faster than a court case.
(3) A DRS would result in less publicity than a court case.
(4) A DRS would cost less than a court case - although this probably isn't a consideration here.

So I stand by my prediction that if Twitter/X want this domain back, the order they will go about trying to acquire it is:
(1) Buying it (minimum publicity, and none at all if there's an NDA)
(2) DRS (some publicity)
(3) IPEC (maximum publicity)

On the other hand, perhaps they really don't care about the domain. I think that would be a shockingly bad decision, but it wouldn't be the first bad Twitter decision that Elon has made - eg paying $44bn for the platform in the first place.

Currently £102 with a day to go. I wonder if the bidders are following this thread?

 

[GreyWing]

If they tried to DRS someone or take someone to court, it would make Mark Monitor look bloody stupid. They'd almost be saying, these idiots dropped the ball. I'd imagine Mark Monitor require positive confirmation to drop something, so I doubt they are at fault, but it would look bad.

As for different tactics. Easy Group always head to Court, try and intimidate people with a High Costs order and they use that to hope people settle. They sent me a letter before action. If you spend money on a solicitor (I did, 2.4k), they'll read it and walk away. If you don't spend money and make a mistake they can strike you out on, they'll go for that and try to claim a win on a technicality.

Don't think Easy Group have ever gone down the DRS route.

 

[ben]

Currently £102 with a day to go. I wonder if the bidders are following this thread?

It'll be someone we know, no doubt lol.

Probably Meskonis and Co. starting a new app for tracking the migration of flocks of birds from one park to another.