A complaint was just filed with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) on the domain name Vanity.com.
Beyond the fact that an undisclosed complainant is trying to take away a dictionary word domain, the even more shocking part is that the domain name is not parked, not inactive but a fully developed site owned by a company named Vanity.com, Inc.
The site has a members area and has sections for Fashion, Beauty, Cosmetic Surgery, well all things about vanity.
The case number is 1443435.
The complainant is not yet listed.
The word Vanity has 27,900,000 results on Google so it’s an often used word.
The UDRP is well out of control now, where those wanting to acquire a domain name that is unavailable due to use or price, are now taking a risk free shot at grabbing the domain name from its lawful owner.
We need UDRP reform and we need it now.
If you build the field (UDRP) and make the fences only 200 feet out – people will come and buy a ticket
1 man panel, don’t pay a thing
has to be guaranteed reverse hijacking found
anything other than thrown out has to be complainant sued and wipo
love to see wipo sued
on the back of something like this I think they are ripe for being sued
clearly just a folly and extortion of fees and inviting criminals to lay claim to something they don’t own
whoever is trying to steal this is scum
This is getting out of hand.
Someone tried to steal Stage.com and failed > http://www.udrpsearch.com/naf/1434227
Lawyers are making the $$$. These lawyers should be fired.
It’s a very sick thing.
ICANN, NAF, and WIPO will only be called out as inept, thieves, and more once the general Internet business community gets a whiff of this crooked system.
To be accurate, this is not exactly a convincingly developed web site. YouTube videos are 4 year old. Contact form is broken. Facebook page not found. Vanity “blog” is from 2010.
Oh, and searching for “Vanity” at http://kepler.sos.ca.gov/ returns 3 corporations that are inactive, and none that matches an active “Vanity, Inc.” in California.
It appears that someone bought the domain/business and screwed up with keeping it up to date.
Acro
So now you want to add to the list of things a domain owner has to have to defend a UDRP are current youtube videos, and an active facebook page and blog.
Mike – As a developer I can tell when a domain – generic or not – appears to be developed, when in fact it isn’t. You say it isn’t parked, I say it is not developed.
you can’t promote artifical scarcity (e.g. see the baby names post) and at the same time not expect to create a seed for disputes. do you really expect someone to agree to an inflated price set by a “domain name holding company” (which holds no trademarks on their “brands”) when it’s less expensive to pay your lawyer to get the domain for you?
think this through. icann is not the uspto. they do not stand behind anything they sell (through their agents- the registries and registrars). they have no real authority. if you have a problem you cannot complain to icann. they are a private sector entity, but can you even successfully sue them? good luck with that. they just take your money. they cannot protect your interests from the real world threats of trademark law. they only protect their own.
there will be no reform of the udrp. icann may be dissolved but that’s another matter.
if you want protection, look to trademark law.
This is unacceptable. If the rights of domain owners are not properly protected, the problem will grow bigger soon. How to solve this?
@Acro… maybe you mean developed WELL.
The term “developed” is very subjective and often misunderstood. Candy.com is developed. Vanity.com appears not to be. Check Screenshots.com etc. I’d be very curious to read the actual complaint, obviously.
@John – No, I mean implying that it’s developed when it’s dead as a dodo.
That’s subjective.
@acro…
so…what exactly are you saying?
They should lose their name?
Acro
The site is not parked
Parked or inactive domains are the only type that have generally been held to show bad faith in a UDRP setting.
The rest is just splitting hairs.
“As a developer I can tell ……”
Christ, when will developer and techie arrogance ever end?
The
I didn’t promote “artificial scarcity” on baby names I stated a fact that all 2,000 .com names were registered.
That’s not artificial its reality.
Now that’s not to say there aren’t .net or .me or .tv or .co that match the top 2,000 baby names and if they are unregistered then people are free to register domains in those extensions.
ICANN is not there to “protect you”
They never said they were nor is it in their charter.
If you want to put stuff on ICANN that’s not on them, that’s your problem
The site must of change owners.
I was interested in developing a bathroom vanity site at one point in my life.
At that time, two years ago i checked vanity.com and it was a better site then now, white background.
@Windy City: Where did I say they should lose the name?
I’m simply commenting on Mike’s statement that the domain is “developed” and that a “Vanity, Inc.” is the owner. I found no such registered company in California.
@99 – When will trolls ever learn to listen?
@Mike – It’s not developed either, and that’s my expert opinion.
It’s my property, I can have it as a parking lot or develop it as a tower.
@Acro – is “BullS” a developed site?
You a developer of what?
Please do not be a turncoat.
I think this is one of the things that T.R.A.F.F.I.C. will need to focus on this year.
These companies and people need to be identified and then held up to public ridicule in a way that will make others think twice before stooping to this level. It is out of control and it is time to shine a spotlight on these cockroaches.
Rick
You can put me on that panel
Vanity.com isn’t parked, it just has a simple website on it that looks more like a minisite than a fully developed website.
Joe
Except it appears to have a members area which is not typical of a mini site
My guess. The vanity.com owner died and someone thinks no response = win a great domain name for the cost of a UDRP.
Domainer
That is not a bad theory but the UDRP is to deal with clear cut cases of TM infringement
This is why I’m saying that the system needs to be reformed, its completely out of control and well beyond what is purpose was when it was set up
the owner seems to be a company and a company cannot die.
There should be a statute of limitations in which can be enforced. This is ridiculous but also setting case history lately. Another counsel should handle appeals
UDRP is one of ICANN’s Flagship Multi-Stakeholder Processes
ICANN is never wrong because The Community (including you) develops the policies and processes – There is no reform
UDRP and the coming URS are part of YOUR ICANN Game
You have to sleep in the bed you made
You do not own your domains – they are game pieces you are allowed to move around – Thanks for playing
The key is getting no response from a dead guy. The company headquarters appears to be a duplex.
A company not only dies, but when it’s not really a company – according to the link I posted – then things should be easy.
Again, those that have no clue what is a minisite, a developed web site and what is a bogus collection of neglected pages put together for the sake of avoiding hit with a UDRP, should stick to parking domains.
Um, we don’t even know what’s really going on other than a UDRP filed on a domain name. Unless someone knows something more “intimate” like a negotiation gone bad between the two parties, all we can do is speculate and maybe feel bad over something we have little to nothing to do directly with it.
I’m sure it’s tempting to think this is like other complainants filing for so-called generic domains where they actually have no demonstrable claims. I’ll try to remember fully and post it here when I can, but there was at least one “case” where the respondent lost an arguably valid decision.
And nope, I’m not saying the complainant or the respondent should win or lose. Again, there are scant details here.
I don’t know about everyone else, but I’d wait and see. Then if the decision turns out to be the arguably common complainant-files-frivolous-case one, then have a go.
Eat or be eaten
Just another round of consolidation – driven by UDRP PAnelists and lawyers that have bills that need to be paid.
a park page is a park page.
mike is right. this is a development. call it whatever way you want or spin it.
topic should be udrp issues and this is insane with filings.
“Ridicule” only effects those motivated by ego (and to them, it’s the single most potent thing on earth)
90% of people or business entities couldn’t care less about that sort of thing, not to mention that the publics general perception (rightly or wrongly) of domain speculators is such that it would be very hard for this group to engender any sympathy whatsoever, even when they’re being credibly fucked over.
What needs to happen are legal strategies that actually get put into courts, fought to completion, judgements entered and effected
When a company tried to steal ChiliBeans from Frank Schilling on the basis of some foriegn mark, didn’t Berryhill file to have their trademark invalidated? That’s a huge counter-attack that potentially leads to a world of hurt for them.
If a US entity tries hijacking a US domain owner, how about a civil suit for tortuous interference? Because that’s precisely what’s happening, given that domains are a contractual obligation between the registrant, registrar and Verisign.
If domainers want this bullshit to end, they need to stop making themselves the fattest pig in the pen who can only squeal and holler when he’s being lead off to slaughter. They must become the boar that nobody wants to deal with. There are legal mechanisms out there to counter-attack, but internet big-talk, bluster and bombast doesn’t mean shit to anyone.
tortuous = tortious
Would you like to submit it to the namepros minisite thread ??
…… sorry i couldn’t help myself
Let’s hope the mayan calendar is right, this has become a UDRP cash grab, they should be throwing these cases out, Rick S said this day would come, those who shunned domain names early on, now even if they want to pay, owners do not want to sell, this is the cowardly type actions they have stooped too.
Only a matter of time, when some poor charity gets fleeced, then newswires will pick up on it. Funny, how we have so much power in numbers, and we are powerless against such actions.
Mini website or Fully website, does not matter!
Vanity.com is not parked page and has a website, that is it.
We know, some compnaies have a simple wesbite with just a few pages.
I mean, does not matter how big wesbite… Website is website… in a theory… Lol!
And I agree with Michael, He says:
“This is why I’m saying that the system (WIPO-UDRP) needs to be reformed, its completely out of control and well beyond what is purpose was when it was set up”
“The UDRP is well out of control now, where those wanting to acquire a domain name that is unavailable due to use or price, are now taking a risk free shot at grabbing the domain name from its lawful owner.
We need UDRP reform and we need it now.”
Mini website or Fully website, does not matter!
Vanity.com is not a parked page and has a website, that is it.
We know, some companies have a simple wesbite with just a few pages.
I mean, does not matter how big wesbite… Website is website… in a theory… Lol!
And I agree with Michael, He says:
“This is why I’m saying that the system (WIPO-UDRP) needs to be reformed, its completely out of control and well beyond what is purpose was when it was set up”
“The UDRP is well out of control now, where those wanting to acquire a domain name that is unavailable due to use or price, are now taking a risk free shot at grabbing the domain name from its lawful owner.
We need UDRP reform and we need it now.”
Mini website or Fully website, does not matter!
Vanity.com is not a parked page and has a website, that is it.
We know, some companies have a simple website with just a few pages.
I mean, does not matter how big website… Website is website… in a theory… Lol!
And I agree with Michael, He says:
“This is why I’m saying that the system (WIPO-UDRP) needs to be reformed, its completely out of control and well beyond what is purpose was when it was set up”
“The UDRP is well out of control now, where those wanting to acquire a domain name that is unavailable due to use or price, are now taking a risk free shot at grabbing the domain name from its lawful owner.
We need UDRP reform and we need it now.”
if icann was not set up to protect the consumer of domain names from monopoly pricing and if it was not set up to provide a resolution mechanism for disputes between domain name owners and trademark owners, then please remind us why it was set up.
if you believe icann is not there to protect you as domain name owners and has no place in the discussion yet you want udrp reform, then who exactly are you going to petition for this reform?
Indeed, Michael we need UDRP reform now! I also agree with Rick Schwartz that we need to shine a very bright light on these cockroaches and expose them. There’s your 1-2 punch, reform, expose or more logically expose and then reform (as reforming will take longer). If anybody finds out in this case who the complainant is, please let us all know. Cheers!
Domain names meet real world. Real world, especially in the 1st world is a F’d up place. What made domains so cool before was their lack of attachment to the real world, lack of legislation, etc… We should consider ourselves lucky to have gotten in when we did. It will be impossible for an average person to get in 10 years from now. It will be like regular real estate with lots of titles, laws, regulations, special courts, and lots of licenses, fees and compliance. Costs will be huge when you add up all the nickel and diming and various things you have to maintain and pay for. It will be like any other job in the 1st world where to work in it you will spend at least half of every day dealing with fixing problems and compliance and paying for things and the smaller balance of the day actually doing your job and attempting to generate revenue.
I don’t think Acro knows fact from fiction anymore, a developed site no matter how broken the code, or old the content is a developed site, a parking page is very distinct, 2 minutes of fame over…
Reform will have to be FORCED by legislation.
The legislation will have to have Sharp Teeth.
There needs to be a set of Legal Requirements that must be met in order to even file a complaint, aimed at reducing frivolous filings and intentional reverse domain highjacking attempts.
Frivolous filings which result in failed complaints and/or reverse domain highjacking will need to carry Very Stiff Fines and Substantial Penalties.
Anything short of this will simply be ignored.
However, what “incentive” do lawmakers have to write laws such as this, which help to make the system more fair towards domain investors that Do Not Infringe on trademarks?
Something that Frank touched on in his latest post is the resentment that many harbor toward domain investors.
I believe that resentment runs deep not only in those “purist geeks” who thought that everything Internet related was meant to be free …I believe the resentment runs just as deep in organizations from ICANN all the way to the bottom of the industry chain.
There are plenty that would like nothing better than to see the secondary domain market terminated.
I DON’T KNOW WHAT WE’RE YELLING ABOUT!!!
Vanity dot com is not a maintained website. Anyone with common web skills can develop that website. The Vanity dot com blog points to a Word Press blog. IMO, the website is an online ghost town.
You can’t contact the website. This website is nothing like Variety dot com or Entertainment dot com. IMO, it seems liked an abandoned website. If Vanity dot com is a fully developed website, then ManoftheWorld dot com is worth $15K. Oh yeah, that was your sales price. Oops!
Not a parked page.
Not a developed site.
Not a mini-site.
Then what the hell is it???
“BullS”, add this site to your collection!!!
All this passive talk on these domain blogs about change, but nobody takes the lead. That’s why you will continue to see more filings to take generic domains worth stealing. All talk, no action. Perfect domain to develop for domain investors who continue to whine.
Want change? Pouting on domain blogs won’t lead you anywhere. Who cares what you write on comment sections on domain blogs. If you want change, use the media, online newspaper sites, and your premium domain names to increase awareness.
Coerce those who think they are entitled to your domains. Would you let a person steal your beachfront property? Let a robber come into your home and steal your personal possessions? No way! Why complain about the same rulings over again? Do something.
We can attach the whiners and complainers label to domain investors. Get used to UDRP filings for top domains. As a collective bunch, write an article about the shaping events. Put in the work to inform those who want to take shortcuts that domainers will never back down without a fight.
I’m not sure I’d called it “fully developed”.
Click around a bit.
Or we NO longer need UDRP since any criminal can use it to steal domains without any punishment
I would not be surprised to see the Complainant as “VanityFair.com”
Both sites are about similar topics: fashion, health etc
If so, one assertion of the Complainant could be because of ‘confusion’ with vanityfair.com
OTHER:
Look at the big picture
It’s pathetic how domainer schmucks can’t see the wood for the trees
Most really are mental pygmies
The issue here is not about “development” or whatnot
For the purposes of the UDRP, it does not distinguish between degrees of “development” to decide whether a domain holder has legitimate rights or interests, or bad faith etc
Michael is 100% spot on as usual. Developed or not, this is an attempt of outright theft. VanityFair (or any other company) does NOT have a right to the generic word “vanity”, for crying out loud. The only one who has a “right” to this domain is the current registrant. This is beyond a disturbing trend at this point. If this continues without a stance, the domain aftermarket and investment industry as we know it will be through at some point. Personally, I feel that the largest players (the ones who have the true means) in the industry need to form a serious coalition/organization to fight this, instead of just talking about it. Rick, Frank, others?
ICANN is Responsible for UDRP and has $350,000,000
Class Action lawsuits are the only thing that gets ICANN’s attention
People are confused about Class Action – The Class (group of domainers) that has been harmed by UDRP has to be established. That is a bounded group of plaintiffs.
Some people think Class Action is for many Defendants to be sued by a small group of plaintiffs. They think the Class would be the group of people who make up ICANN and all of the broken policies and processes. That is backwards.
ICANN is the single Digital.Target with $350,000,000+ to pay to the Class.
Domainers are also now excluded from gTLD opportunities which is discrimination. The UDRP is used to discriminate. ICANN also discriminates against other Affected Classes (low income, handicapped, etc) via fees.
The U.S. Government can also file what amount to Class Action suits on
behalf of the citizens of the nation ICANN has harmed.
Class Action lawsuits are the only thing that gets ICANN’s attention
Clearly not a fully developed site. It almost has the feel of a site put together just as reasoning against this sort of claim. It was a nice try, but it does not even look like a real business, rather an information blog. As Kevin said “click around a bit.”
I differ with Arco about how to protect your business intentions. The best offense is a good defense.
Check out MINE.
http://fragerfactor.blogspot.com/2012/05/udrp-domain-names-meet-real-world.html
Lemme see if I have this thing clear. Domainers want stiffer penalties for RDNH but yet when a cybersquatter registers 15 iterations of facebook.com and gets a udrp they simply dont respond and lose the names without monetary damages.
Wake up you MORONS! This is karma. For the last decade many of you had a blast registering typos of big insurance companies, search giants, and other fortune 500s and made bank at their expense, Now when tm holders fight back using similarly slimy tactics domainers are offended. LOLOLOL. The height of hypocracy domainers are.
Is the owner of vanity.com an innocent victim? Perhaps they are, but so were all those companies that were forced to spend money to take back typos from squatters. Payback is a bitch huh. Spit in a guys face and see what response it illicits. TM owners are tired of being spit on and guess what, the big dog is biting back. I think it was to be expected, after all, all is fair in love, war, business and domains right? At the end of the day, this stuff is simply a cost of doing business in a screwed up space. Better have a contingency fund to deal with this kind of attack because we will see more of them and it will definitely get worse before it gets better.
TM owners have finally figured out a way to deal with domainers…by thinking and acting like domainers. Karma.
Don’t have to look hard on the popular parking platforms. You can still find typos of TM holders.
When you are trying to reach one popular site ranked under 200 on Alexa, you will either reach Internet Traffic with the TM holder as a related link. It was mentioned a few times prior. Now seems the related links have been adjusted to avoid that company.
There is another popular company that owns many top domains. They also have typos and borderline domains.
In my opinion, people are filing since they know it takes little effort and there are no penalties. Discussing and complaining on domain blogs alert future complainants to make a valid attempt.
Develop a site to show all the bad decisions. Make it known that domainers are going to fight. Get some of the top domain companies involved because they rely on domainers to make revenue. They’re losing money in an event that they’re customer loses a domain (commission).
It is a simple solution. One from now, domainers doing nothing will keep posting bad filings and commenting about poor decisions. Scare those who think they can take what they think belongs to them without working out an ethical deal. It is about about integrity and ethics.
How can a new company operate under the name when they are know to have taken a domain through unethical means? (IMO). Customers prefer to do business with honest companies and individuals.
There are solutions. Whining and complaining does little to curb future filings. Writing blogs on a domain site to make an example is ineffective as well. Think about past change. What did it require to pass the Cybersquatting Act? It just takes call to action to enforce change.
Karma does have a lot to do with these cases. Companies and individuals can get what thry want through business deals. Domainers ask extremely high prices. They block innovation.
In this Vanity case, even a company such Vanity Affair can benefit from this domain. They can use this domain to reach a huge population. As more details surface, you will know the identity of the group and or individual.
@Kar Mah
Vanity is a generic word. Vanity.com was registered in 1995. It isn’t a typo of a “big insurance company, search giant, or other fortune 500.” So your rant about this being “Karma” doesn’t have anything to do with this particular case.
Revision:
Don’t have to look hard on the popular parking platforms find typos of TM holders. When you are trying to reach one popular site ranked under 200 on Alexa, you will reach Internet Traffic with the TM holder as a related link. It was mentioned a few times prior. Now it seems the related links have been adjusted to avoid that company. There is another popular company that owns many top domains. They also have typos and borderline domains.
In my opinion, people are filing since they know it takes little effort and there are no penalties. Discussing and complaining on domain blogs alert future complainants to make a valid attempt.
Develop a site to show all the bad decisions. Make it known that domainers are going to fight. Get some of the top domain companies involved because they rely on domainers to make revenue. They’re losing money in an event that their customers lose a domain in an unfair ruling (commission).
It is a simple solution. One year from now, domainers doing nothing will keep posting bad filings and commenting about poor decisions. Scare those who think they can take what they think belongs to them without working out an ethical deal. It is about about integrity and ethics.
How can a new company operate under the name when they are known to have taken a domain through unethical means? (IMO). Customers prefer to do business with honest companies and individuals.
There are solutions. Whining and complaining does little to curb future filings. Writing blogs on a domain site to make an example of a complainant is ineffective as well. Think about past change. What did it require to pass the Cybersquatting Act? It just takes call to action to enforce change.
Karma does have a lot to do with these cases. Companies and individuals can’t get what they want through business deals. Domainers ask extremely high prices to block innovation.
In this Vanity case, even a company such as Vanity Affair can benefit from this domain. They can use this domain to reach a huge population. As more details surface, you will soon learn the identity of the group and or individual.
It is not “fully developed” ad it is saying above, in fact if you go to http://vanity.com/terms/, you read
“This site is in BETA mode. Site is as is and may change while in Beta. Please send all feedback to info@vanity.com.
About Vanity
Vanity.com was incorporated in 2006.
Please send all inquiries via the Contact Us Page.”
Also if you click “facebook” at the top, it goes to http://www.facebook.com/Vanity, a 404 page of Facebook (they do not allow 1 word pages yet, unless you have a trademark, IE http://www.facebook.com/apple)
So here you have a BETA site, by [domain.com], Inc., and a nice wordpress template, but not much else, but that does not mean any 3rd party should be able to steal these names.
Correction: Vanity Fair rather than Vanity Affair
Check out past MTV.com case in 90s involving employee and MTV.
Check out a landing page for pub.com. If this domain owner claims he will never give up his generic domains, then others know he will probably fight any attempts.
Parking companies are too risky. A generic name can conflict with another brand using a two word name.
Once you read the facts involving the case, then you will understand the filing. Right now, people are accusing the complainant of reverse domain hijack and stealing. Wait until the facts surface.
There is at least one person here who has been threatened with a UDRP attributed to negotiating a domain deal. When a company is rejected many times, they become weary on how they can afford the domain. Bingo: UDRP.
Overpriced wrote:
> Karma does have a lot to do with these cases. Companies
> and individuals can’t get what they want through business
> deals. Domainers ask extremely high prices to block innovation.
Karma seems to be a very popular and overused word these days, with the vast majority of the people who use it, only seeming to have a very simplistic understanding of its true meaning. This isn’t Karma. And it’s somewhat humorous to think that asking a high price for something would give one bad Karma, anyway. (Stores like Nordstrom, and fancy 5-star French restaurants would have very bad Karma by now, if that was true.)
“”There is at least one person here who has been threatened with a UDRP attributed to negotiating a domain deal. “”
This is common place now
Ask your friend Frank to implement his Reverse Domain Hijacking to deter wreckless filings. He owns the dot com.
Reverse Domain Hijack is registered under a domain owner who is an Internet Traffic client.
Two domains with the power to coerce future rulings. Increase awareness to reduce future filings. Complaining will never lead change.
Overpriced wrote:
> When a company is rejected many times, they become weary on
> how they can afford the domain. Bingo: UDRP.
>
Which is why there should be reform on UDRPs. No one has the right to something, if someone else doesn’t want to sell it. Becoming “weary” is not a valid excuse.
Knee-jerk reaction. Udrp gets filed against vanity.com then scores of posts complaining about WIPO.
Somebody regged it in 1995 and put up a fancy-looking dead site. Maybe the owner is dead and doesn’t respond to any inquiries or the udrp. Maybe the udrp filer can get it by way of non-response from dead people. Weasel tactics but who knows? Shut up the noise and watch the case and then there is something to talk about.
Threatening and pursuing a UDRP are different. People talk, but then others act. It probably takes some lengthy discussion to file a UDRP since people gain access to the complaint.
It is public knowledge. Asking extremely high prices can inspire end-users to file instead of choosing an alternative such as another domain.
Legal researchers can evaluate past rulings to determine whether the system is in fact fair or needs major insight and reform.
The top people won’t take action until they experience an unfair filing against their valuable domain. A bigger domain will enter a filing, which means a stronger company with the means to make noise will put forth a fight.
Overpriced
I think your overly simplifying the issue.
Usually when I get these type of letters they offer something like $50 not even the cost of the complaint and most cases I haven’t even quoted a price yet.
Others go directly to the UDRP without even sending a letter or 1st.
May of these company’s hold domain holders in low regard, actually think they are entitled to the domain as a matter of right.
@ Innoc ““Karma” doesn’t have anything to do with this particular case.”
Really! There have bee n 4 or 5 dreadful decisions in the past month or so. If you take a look at the panelists who presided over them you will find that they were amounst the most domainer friendly panelists out there. Panelists often requested by domainers. In case you missed it something has changed. Why? The reason is that these panelists are sick and tired of seeing the same respondents time after time and hearing the same lame defenses time and time again (my upstream partner did it!). Do you not wonder what has happened in the minds of these previously fair panelists to make them go off the rails. Anyways the facts are the facts, these crazy disputes are being filed and they are being won. If not Karma, it is payback of some sort. How else would you explain it. Perhaps its something else..perhaps its the screw me sign that domainers wear. They have been systematically screwed over by ICANN, their registrars, their parking providers, google, and more. Perhaps that explains things better than Karma. Maybe its the screw me over shirt that domainers wear that has invited these kinds of claims.
Its Karma, and in many ways deserved albeit that vanity.com may or may not deserve it but either way they are definitely caught in the cross fire.
Kar Mah –
Your logic speaks for the 8-5 lifer who wants everything to be perfect – cannot stand any drama, answers to anybody just to keep their job, catches up on day-time talk shows and watches reality tv and all the lawyer shows waiting for some fucking politician or celebrity to tell them they are a victim or entitled to something.
That is no way to go thru life – Maike Mann’s words sum it up – UDRP is as reliable as a coin flip and as valuable as the coin itself.
You only get as much justice as you can afford – need to use the real courts where the judges are paid by taxpayers – not complainants.
“lets throw up a website and highlight all these domain stealing companies”
Trust me, no one gives a s***.
Remember the GOP debate where the audience shouted let him die, that was another human being they were talking about, you think people will be outraged by big companies taking domains?
Mhb –
Are the amount of udrps actually increasing year on year? If so do you put this down to companies becoming more aware internally or are they being made aware by third parties, online reputation companies and lawyers?
Vanity.com is a company, it’s just based in Nevada. Not sure if this link will work:
http://nvsos.gov/sosentitysearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=pfmQoXtix%252fdK5nWFU%252fEd8w%253d%253d&nt7=0
Name of officer on business filing matches whois
@ Kar Mah – you seem to be confusing cybersquatters (typo registrations, TM’d names, etc.) with domain investing (vanity.com, shoes.com, etc.). There is a very large difference. However, and please correct me if I’m incorrect, but it sounds like you are someone that does not see a difference between the two and might account for your hostility.
For those keeping score at home,
Gaines Milligan: 1
Arco: 0
In any industry, leaders take initiative as small investors/businessmen neither have contacts nor monetary sources.
In our industry, leaders talk and shoud when they were hit by UDRP. Otherwise, they remain silent.
Those who earned millions of rupees are seeing these mad things in silence unless they were hit by reverse hijacking. They can easily use their clout to report such mad decisions in mainstream media.
For me just like everyone, passing a comment is the easiest thing (even though waste one).
@Andrew
You mean “was a company”. Their status lapsed a long time ago. Their last filing with the NV SoS was due in June 2011. Take a closer look at the corporate record you linked.
So, one could stop right there and say that since the domain name is registered to “Vanity.com Inc.” and that entity itself has lapsed, then the domain name registration is itself invalid in the first place. There is no “owner” of this domain name.
It is unlikely the people associated with the company are aware of the proceeding, since the domain name for the admin contact email address is itself a Godaddy parked name. So, one could stop right there and say that if the email contacts for the domain name are invalid, then the domain name registration itself is invalid.
What’s interesting is that the email contacts for the domain name identified in the admin contact are gmail addresses, and might work.
As far as being “developed” goes, what’s peculiar about the “ghost town” feel of it is that the history of what’s been there is also kind of odd. It was a Domainsponsor parking page back in 2007 or thereabouts, and then became a “coming soon” page. It went through some revisions of the “coming soon” layout and then changed into a blog sometime between April and June of 2009. Oddly, the first article on that blog page is dated “December 2008” as if someone was trying, in 2009, to convey the impression of a false past history. The content doesn’t change again until late 2010.
Now, there’s only so much one can attempt to figure out by web page history, which may not tell the whole story.
I am curious about one thing, though. Assuming that the filing here is deemed “frivolous”, and if there were some sort of monetary award to the registrant for frivolous filings, could someone explain to me to whom they would write that check?
on behalf of vanity, greed, lust, gluttony and all domainers worldwide, i will accept the cheque.
problem solved.
@John Berryhill “could someone explain to me to whom they would write that check?”
—-
Whois shows the registrant of Vanity.com as JoLynn Frederick, with contact info as:
10358 Alpine Drive #1
Cupertino, California United States
United States
4159027471
At VanityCorp.com, her address is changed, but the phone is the same.
JoLynn Frederick
10710 Baxter Ave
Los Altos, California 94024
United States
+0.4159027471
The second address seems more recent, since VanityCorp.com was registered in 2007. In any event, they’re both home addresses. According to Zillow, the second address is valued at just over a million bucks, so she should be able to defend this, if she is aware of it, anyway.
“that entity itself has lapsed, then the domain name registration is itself invalid in the first place. There is no “owner” of this domain name.”
====
1. Based on what “new” gTLD Applicants at ICANN are saying, the “owner” is Verisign. gTLD Applicants plan to “own” an entire name-space. That is more misguided than having Verisign “own” .COM via their contract(s) with the US.
2. Some legal sharks may try to argue that the “Registrar” actually “owns” the domain because they have the means manipulate the Verisign .COM database. Verisign is a passive party in the matter. Registrars now commonly assume ownership for juicy dropped names rather than allowing them back into some drop shark pool. Registrars have become the sharks.
3. A very small minority of people think that ICANN is the “owner” because ICANN can pull the plug on the .COM contract. That is very misguided because ICANN contracts to have their Registrars obtain favorable fixed pricing with the .COM Registry which is a US Government work product. ICANN has no ability to manipulate the “ownership” of domains. ICANN collects fees just like a labor union. They do not do any of the heavy lifting.
Taking a closer focus…and looking at the new Domain Name System
“There is no “owner” of this domain name”
If that is the case, the domain name will [expire] and vanish from the system.
Some lucky winner in a Digital-Archery contest or HALO tournament may be able to coax the domain back to life. It will help to have some technical clue to do that. Those clues will not be cheap.
When the domain re-emerges in the new Domain Name System, the “owner” will be widely known but not likely tied to a place you can drive by with Google Street-View. If you want to buy the domain, you will not be “sending a check”. You will wire DNS money. You will be transferred ownership and also all the credentials to ensure you can sleep at night knowing you now “own” the domain with the ((physical)) credentials locked in your safe deposit box in the bank.
It will be very hard to “own” more than a few domains.
For those NOT at the ICANN Insider’s Meetings in Los Angeles this week…
“There is no “owner” of this domain name”
If that is the case, the domain name will [expire] and vanish from the system(S).
The domain will vanish from the legacy Verisign-managed .COM database, and renewals will be ignored. 🙂
The domain will ALSO vanish from the NEW Domain Name System that is UNTOUCHED by ICANN, Verisign, or governments. The expiration process in the NEW Domain Name System is very complex and tied to digital currency and very large cryptographic keys.
If you give people your keys, they can steal your domains.
@berryhill “there is no owner”
No registrant owns their domain, they rent them
Having said that if a corporation lapses owing a ton of tax to the IRS can someone please explain to me who is responsible for the tax liability.
The director(s) that’s who!
When corps “lapse” they become proprietorships they do not dissapear as tho they neve existed. If vanitys corp registration lapsed it could be deactivated simply and retroactively otherwise the director if a sole director retains the beneficial interest in the assets and liabilitys of the corp as a proprietor.
You make it sound like you can erase history by simply lapsing a corp. if that was the case officers would simply strike their corporations from the corp registry any time their we’re legal issues looming.
Make the check out to the principal
“No registrant owns their domain, they rent them”
Who do they “rent” them from ?
BTW, people may be fascinated to study U.S. State laws regarding the disposition of real estate when a person dies with no family, no heirs, no will, etc. The house and land have no ability to sell themselves to some passer-by.
Imagine a small computer (or several) where a real domain name lives. It can be programmed to sell-itself to the highest bidder if abandoned. Then one has to deal with the “money” stored in that small computer. The domain is gone. The money is still there, or at least the digital keys to access the money.
“Having said that if a corporation lapses owing a ton of tax to the IRS can someone please explain to me who is responsible for the tax liability.
The director(s) that’s who!”
The problem here is, Pro, that the domain name registration is subject to the terms of the registration contract. I haven’t looked at this registrar in particular, but it is not at all unusual for registration contracts to be rendered void upon lapse or bankruptcy of the registrant.
If you are of the persuasion that the domain name is “rented”, as you said, then it should be immediately clear to you that, unlike other assets, leases and contracts for services are not somehow automatically assigned to the directors of a corporation upon its dissolution.
Why pay for it when you can steal it? It does not matter if there was a site or parked. Somebody paid for it and invested his or her hard earned money into this name. they are not infringing on anybody’s rights.
Out of the blue you get hit with a UDRP.
The person who filed the UDRP must be held accountable and pay punitive damages to the domain holder for attorney fees stress and more.
This is out of control.
@John Berryhill : What happens if a second UDRP files on the same name before the first case is heard? What’s to stop any one of these companies to also claim a right?
evanity.com: Vanity is a specialty retailer offering the latest lifestyle trends and fashion designs for style-conscious young women, including jeans, tops, dresses with retail stores in the USA http://www.evanity.com/index.php/store_locator
http://vanitylv.com – Vanity Nightclub Las Vegas … Vanity Night Club Fact Sheet. Vanity is open every Friday, Saturday and Sunday, from 10:30pm until 4am located at The Hard Rock hotel and hosting the Interscope Records/Billboard Music Awards after party May 20th.
Home Depot, Lowes , countless other bathroom resellers – They sell these every day!
The simple thing is this: Domains should be looked at as real estate. If the real estate is “leased” from the government to do lumber clearcutting or strip mining, nobody comes in and tries to “steal” that land.
If you buy land for cheap however it comes by LEGALLY, you own that land as long as it is legally registered. If you own a domain name that is purchased BEFORE another company suddenly decides they want it, and your domain is generic descriptive, not infringing on a clear TM, then you own it.
This “is the website developed” discussion is just a red herring. Bottom line – buy a generic common use domain name, before any company/person decides to TM it or use it as a prodserv, that domain property is YOURS. PERIOD.
The rest of the discussion is moot, and not even close to being based on the American system of capitalism. We know it, ICANN knows it, but there are now companies with the money to rip logic out of how do decide the rightful ownership of a simple DOMAIN NAME.
All other discussions about “site development and usage” should be ignored, or, I’ll start filing lawsuits against every landowner who leaves it as an empty lot, or who feels owning 1000 acres of grazing land where 100 cattle will never reach, should be taken away from the rancher who bought it. Punish that rancher for not building a hotel on his land.
Come on people. Like someone said in this comment section – stop whining and organize. ooops, I said that back in 2005 — but the people who will win are the people who are winning already and they will shape the game so that they continue to win. The only other solution is for domainers TO ORGANIZE.
Nothing will piss you off more than owning a million dollar generic domain name that some powerful company ripped from you, because they have the resources and backing of “like-minded” people who don’t have a financial stake in your investment other than to steal it from you.
“The only other solution is for domainers TO ORGANIZE”
ICANN is Responsible for UDRP and has $350,000,000
Some of the largest domain companies in the world fall on their knees before the ICANN and ISOC Clerics. The Clerics will crush the life out of anyone that gets in their way. It is their way or the highway.
Some would say it is good for Americans to learn what it is like to live in a Totalitarian State. It seeks overall control.
So much misinfromation.
So little time to explain.
When you pay for a domain name, you do not get ownership of anything. You get an entry in a text file, called a zone file, on a computer or set of computers and you get an entry in a database called “whois”. Those computers act as “servers”. They listen for connections and they spit back text. In this case, the text is an IP address or several.
Lots of people use these computers, or “servers”, to figure out the IP addresses that “domain names” are used to represent, and to look up registrants of domain names. They send the server the domain name and the server spits back an IP address. Once you have the IP address you can connect to whatever website it is you’re trying to visit.
(If you’re smart you might ask “Why do I even need to use a domain name if all I need is the IP address to connect? The answer is: You don’t. But thnks to the way people set up websites, putting many sites on one machine (the infamous “web hosting” business), you do often need to know the domain name, too. But not always!)
What’s interesting is that anyone can run these computers (“servers”) and offer entries in a zone file, including you. It is neither complex nor expensive. And by the same token anyone else can use those computers, subject to the permission of the person running the server to allow you to access it. It’s a free internet. Not a totalitarian regime. Except in some countries. lol.
If a domain name is “real estate”, this means anyone can create real estate, whenever they need more real estate.
Now, if the internet were some sort of totalitarian regime and users were forced under threat of [insert something awful here] to use only one set of servers to get IP addresses, then we might be able to say the amount of available domain names, i.e. the amount of “real estate”, is limited.
But that sort of threat does not exist in the majority of countries, if it even exists at all. Countries that are technically sophisticated censors just block access to information, they do not try to prevent people from offering it. And something tells me trying to restrict people’s access to IP address information in countries that take a dim view of censorship would not go over too well with their freedom loving internet users.
“Now, if the internet were some sort of totalitarian regime and users were forced under threat of [insert something awful here] to use only one set of servers to get IP addresses, then we might be able to say the amount of available domain names, i.e. the amount of “real estate”, is limited.”
1. The “real estate” is the IP Address space which is recorded in the DNS under IN-ADDR.ARPA. That is a tightly controlled regime with strong-arming and threats. Financial kick-backs are paid to the insiders for the “real estate”.
2. Once the insiders have control of the “real estate” they sell road signs (domains) and bill-boards (web sites) to distract people from their totalitarian regime that controls the “real estate”. Domains are icing on the cake. The insiders do not want to allow outsiders into their tax and spend road-show game.
3. As with most totalitarian regimes, the insiders live like kings and queens. The unwashed masses are kept in the dark and not allowed into the easy money games. The insiders are very happy. They even claim they are a democracy with elections. There is one party and only candidates from their club.
It is their way or the highway.
It Seeks Overall Control
Follow the Money
$350,000,0000 is now in ICANN’s coffers – what can they use that for ?
$34,000,000 flows into the ISOC each year for doing largely nothing
You do not even want to know how the RIR’s finances work out…
Vanity is now a cosmetic surgery company. Maybe the previous domain holder sold the site, or the two parties reached an agreement while in the UDRP process.
It is no longer an undeveloped site. It is now a company site.
Its not any more developed then it was before… come on, what “company” site would have adsense and “under construction” pages?
First of all, if there is really a case brewing for the ownership of Vanity.com I really hope someone updates us on what’s happening because I don’t see any updates out there. Secondly, I really hope the current owner wins because it’s a commonly used dictionary name and as I’ve said before, if a business makes the decision to put a commonly used dictionary word in their company name then icann needs to make clear that if that company goes after the actual dictionary word they will NOT win a WIPO decision.
For the folks that say “you rent domain names but never really own them” I disagree and say you do own it and are responsible for it during the time it’s registered to you or under your control. Let’s assume it’s a domain people other than you actually want to own it and let’s compare it to property “land and home type property” and you live in the U.S. and your homes bought and paid for, paid off. You still have to pay yearly property taxes which can be expensive and home owners insurance. If you don’t at least pay the yearly property taxes then at some point someone will take over your home, whether it’s put up for auction or the state comes in. In the case of a domain name, it’s really no different, if you don’t pay the registration fees someone will take it over but while you made the payments it was yours.
Dave
The Vanity UDRP decision is still pending.
There is no update because there is no decision yet.
I see a complaint was denied this morning on eram.com which is a vertical axis domain so Ari probably defended that one and The Ham brothers won.
However the case has not been published yet
Thanks for the update on the Vanity.com UDRP.
It’s just hard to believe ICANN would rule in favor of a company going after an exact, commonly used dictionary word. Does anyone know if it’s happened before?
Is there an unbiased committee who governs ICANN?
Just playing the devil’s advocate, is it possible a large company that earns 100’s of millions of dollars per year like some of the companies that would be interested in the vanity url’s could offer a payoff to icann or icann members to rule in their favor? Who would ever know besides the folks directly involved?
There definitely needs to be a set rule or law that any company shall not win a UDRP case to take away exact dictionary names from the current owner. There’s absolutely no reason any owner of a dictionary word domain name should have to set around and worry that any day anyone can file a claim and possibly take it away. It’s wrong!
The only reason I see to allow dictionary word domain name UDRP claims open and up for grabs is money.
UPDATE – The owner lost the UDRP:
http://www.udrpsearch.com/naf/1443435
I’m having a hard time understanding how the panel ignored the fact that the respondent holds a USPTO TM for “Vanity.com”. Wouldn’t that be sufficient to refute this complaint?