I think qualifies as a “Wow”
The domain name WallStreet.com has been hit with a UDRP.
The complaint is Wall-Street.com, LLC.
Wall-Street.com has an original creation date of April 24th 1995
WallStreet.com which has been sold a few times now is showing an original creation date of only November 2010.
WallStreet.com site is just registrar placeholder.
The domain is registered with NetNames.com which is a brand protection company.
The placeholder does not have “ads” on the page but does advertise NetNames.com service.
The domain name WallStreet.com is owned by Internet Opportunity Entertainment (Sports) Limited c/o Corporate & Trust Services (Caribbean) Limited.
You may recall that WallStreet.com was the 1st million dollar domain sale, and was brokered by Monte Cahn currently with RightoftheDot.com in 1999.
Here is the Trademark of Wall-Street.com:
| WALL-STREET.COM | |
| Goods and Services | IC 035. US 100 101 102. G & S: Public Relations services, namely promoting the businesses of others, through the dissemination of printed materials; and advertising agency services. FIRST USE: 19981109. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19981109IC 036. US 100 101 102. G & S: Providing financial information to investors on a web site, on a global computer network. FIRST USE: 19981109. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19981109 |
| Standard Characters Claimed | |
| Mark Drawing Code | (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK |
| Serial Number | 76574820 |
| Filing Date | February 6, 2004 |
| Current Basis | 1A |
| Original Filing Basis | 1A |
| Published for Opposition | August 23, 2005 |
| Registration Number | 3014499 |
| Registration Date | November 15, 2005 |
| Owner | (REGISTRANT) National Corporate Services, Inc. CORPORATION COLORADO P.O. Box 460310 Aurora COLORADO 800460310(LAST LISTED OWNER) WALL-STREET.COM, LLC LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY FLORIDA 6301 NW 5TH WAY SUITE 1400 FORT LAUDERDALE FLORIDA 33309 |
| Assignment Recorded | ASSIGNMENT RECORDED |
| Attorney of Record | John E. Reilly |
| Type of Mark | SERVICE MARK |
| Register | PRINCIPAL-2(F) |
| Affidavit Text | SECT 15. SECT 8 (6-YR). |
| Live/Dead Indicator | LIVE |
“I think qualifies as a “Wow”….”
====
Wait until you see the .SHOCK and .AWE (coming soon) 🙂
You may need a Pay.WALL version of The-Domains in .OMG
The weak point is a 2010 sale. If this were to go against the domain owner, that would damage the aftermarket significantly. It would make joint ventures the way to sell a domain without selling it. That said I can’t imagine how they can lay claim to something like this. But now we are seeing it daily and I think these companies risk significant blowback in the future.
ouch, that’s gonna leave a mark.
OK, I get it, what they got to lose.
My jaw dropped when I read that.
Yeah, this one is a WOW!
“That said I can’t imagine how they can lay claim to something like this.”
=======
HEADS.UP – there is a guy posting on RICKS-BLOG about a .WAR coming in #Domains – Imagine that!!! a dotWAR
There was no application for .War
There is one for .WARMAN but that’s a brand
“There was no application for .War”
====
There was no application **revealed** by ICANN in .LONDON for .WAR
.GAC
Wall-Street.com has nuilt its brand off of a generic term AND a commonly used term – i.e. riding the coattails – yet has not created any secondary meaning for the term.
An insult to UDRP and the UDRP Panel assigned
All submitted applications were revealed
Enough with the conspiracy crap the new gTLD program is complicated enough and messy enough without people trying to place ICANN on the grassy knoll
“All submitted applications were revealed”
What about Applicants that obtained a 100% Refund before the Reveal ?
Also, Mike Roberts the Founding CEO of ICANN has stated several times that ICANN Applications are screened (culled) by law enforcement organizations.
.BTW – As of 2011, Mike Roberts was still telling people “he runs ICANN”.
Mike,
WallStreet.com is showing an original creation date of 01-sep-1994, not only November 2010.
The registrar Ascio is simply not reporting the creation date correctly.
ICANN
Applicants that received 100% refund withdrew their applications and are no longer applicants.
The officers, directors and 15% or greater shareholders will have a criminal background check as required by the Guidebook
It took them this long to realize they’re losing traffic. More RDNH
If ever there was a blatant attempt at RNDH this is it !!!
Per Seb –
What I do is go to http://www.NetSol.com do a WHOIS and at the bottom click on :
“Show underlying registry data for this record”
Which is an easy way to get the central registry vs. trying to remember where to go within Verisign.
And Yes – that record still reveals the 1994 original date
@Brian
That’s what i do too
WallStreet.com used for gambling back in early 2000.
@MHB
“Wall-Street.com has an original creation date of April 24th 1995
WallStreet.com which has been sold a few times now is showing an original creation date of only November 2010.”
Maybe I misunderstood what you really meant, but WallStreet.com has an original creation date of September 1st, 1994.
Joe –
An earlier comment by Seb brings this to light – possibky you overlooked it
@Brian
I didn’t see it. Thanks
Original creation date of 1994 is still intact. Maybe Wall Street believes the domain holder is not using the domain to its fullest advantage. Why should a complainant worry? There are no policies in place to penalize them.
IMO, if you want to protect your top assets, register a TM on the niche space rather than on the name itself. After many unfair rulings, people still sit back whining and complaining. Any person can take your domain name. The question is: Do they want your domain name?
Once the end-user realizes the value of the domain name, you better watch out! There is internal motivation that is unethical. Who is informing them to file? More cases this year than in any other year.
Wall Street is a generic term. This dispute a joke.
UDRP are just cheap lottery tickets now.
A way to potentially acquire (AKA steal) high dollar generic assets in a kangaroo court that does not respect precedent.
Brad
The owner is Sportingbet, a gambling business. I’d be curious to know how they got this domain…
If the owners of WallStreet.com were using the domain to sell public relations services then there would be a basis for an intellectual property complaint. Since they are not, I guess it will come down to whether the panelist(s) are jealous of domain owners and want to destroy the aftermarket.
what a load of crap wall-street.com is too..
can’t even get an alexa rank above a million after a year of trying lol
looks like their users think it’s crap too..
SAME AS FOR DOT NET with DOT WEB WEBS WEBSITE….
NEW GTLDS EXCEPT COUNTRY /GEOGRAPHIC TLD ARE USELESS AND EVEN DANGEROUS BECAUSE IT MEANS DEPENDING OF YOUR OPINION YOU VE GOT A LABEL ON YOUR HEAD
a dot ninja nobody care but what can we think of a dot islam …
Progress means cuting/ divize people like new gtlds depending on sex orientation, taste, opinions, politics
so what is the difference with a dictatorship ??
EVERY DOMAINER IS SUBJECT TO UDRP PROCEDURE EVEN THOUGH HE HAS BOUGHT IT BEFORE ARE WE IN DEMOCRACY WAKE UP THE DOMAIN NAME IS AN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY YOU SHOULD BUY SELL RENT LEASE PERCEIVE ROYALTIES OR ECHANGE AGEINST SHARE IN ENTREPREUNEURSHIP
WAKE UP THE DOT COM IS THE MOST POWERFUL CAPITAL ASSET EVER !!!
Hello Michael,
There are going to be a hell of a lot of lawsuits coming NETSOLS way in the near future. All pre 2000 registrations creation dates are suspect BIG TIME ! I was there back in the day and have complained about this over the last 15 years,repeatedly on many forums and blogs, Check it out.
Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)
I think DomainTools.com provides a powerful way to view and understand registration history of a domain name. I tried looking up the whois record of WallStreet.com on DomainTools.com.
http://whois.domaintools.com/wallstreet.com
This is a line from the whois record that DomainTools shows.
Whois History: 1,152 records have been archived since 2001-07-27
Does this indicate WallStreet.com was registered since July 27, 2001?
@Patrick Dey
No, that’s likely the earliest record DomainTools was able to capture. Besides, if you do a WHOIS lookup, you’ll see the domain name’s been registered since 01-sep-1994.
Anything could’ve happened between that time and now.
domaintools is not very powerful.
they just forward your query to the appropriate whois server. you could easily do this yourself.
(they are a “whois gateway”. there are lots and lots of whois gateways. you could set one up yourself quite easily.)
domaintools records what you look up and stores it.
not every gateway stores the info that users look up. but there are advantages to storing it.
if others look up the same the same name, it appears to them that domaintools has some amazing database of whois info.
nope. they only have whois info on names that people like you have looked up.
if no one looks up a name, they won’t have whois info about it.
it is hardly a comprehensive database.
Any update?
@ Joe
Complaint denied: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/case.jsp?case_id=23991
COMPLAINT DENIED
12-Sep-2012
Brad
Thanks, Brad. That’s the right verdict IMO.
I’m waiting for the actual opinion to be published
Even Richard G. Lyon “ruled” in favor of the domain owner – Good God – the world is coming to an end 🙂
Well, first of all, the Wall Street in New York is not the only street in the USA named Wall Street. It is a generic term not owned by anyone and there are many streets in many US cities named Wall Street!. Number 2, to infringe on someones “TradeMark”, there must be an element of confusion. Right now there is NO element of confusion between WallStreet.com and Wall-Street.com. Both sites are NOT doing the same thing. (hello!!!) Also, there is NO BAD FAITH in the registration of WallStreet.com as it was originally registered BEFORE Wall-Street.com and 10 years before Wall-Street.com filed for Trademark Registration. WallStreet.com was registered in 1994 and Wall-Street.com was one year later. The registration of Wall-Street.com came AFTER and the original purchasers surely knew that WallStreet.com was already taken as it was PUBLIC RECORD at Network Solutions Whois; that’s why they bought the INFERIOR name with the hyphen. This is a clear case of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking and the owners of Wall-Street.com should be severly penalized.
There is a Delta Airlines, a Delta Faucet and a Delta Financial. All companies can use the word Delta as there is no element of confusion between an airline and a faucet maker. Try booking a flight at Delta Faucets website and see what happens. As long as the owners of WallStreet.com do no operate a business that would cause confusion with Wall-Street.com, then Wall-Street.com has NO CASE. And at this moment, this is clearly the case as there IS NO ELEMENT OF CONFUSION.
What Wall-Street.com is doing is not only unethical, it should be illegal and if I were the judge, I would take away their domain name as a penalty for attempting to Reverse Domain Name Hijack!!!
There definately was NO BAD FAITH either, and in today’s UDRP decisions, there must be BAD FAITH in the registration process in order for the name to be taken away. This case should be easily thrown out due to the obvious case of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking…
P.S.~ why isn’t Wall-Street.com going after:
WallStreet.net
WallStreet.org
WallStreet.info
WallStreet.us.com
Wallstreet.co
WallStreet.cc
WallStreet.ca
WallStreet.biz
WallStreet.nu
WallStreet.tv ???
I’ll tell you why, they only want the premier domain name, the dot com. The fact that they are only going after the dot com and not all the rest surely show just how UNETHICAL they are!!!
In my opinion, if the UDRP gives WallStreet.com to Wall-Street.com, they should have to give them all the other domain names too as everyone of them is breaking the rules. It’s so obvious that this whole case is a joke!!! When will there be reverse domain name hijacking laws with penalties? People who attempt to reverse domain name hijack face NO consequences, if they did, they may think twice before filing a UDRP complaint. Maybe they should impose a $50,000 fine if they lose, or the loss of their domain name to the person they are challenging. That would surely change things!
Wall-Street.com…YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF! GET READY TO LOSE BIG!!!
I THINK I’M GOING TO BUY A DOMAIN NAME TODAY! http://www.BoycottWall-Street.com