A UDRP on the Generic domain name Six.com has just been filed.
The domain is owned by Xedoc Holding SA, of Luxembourg.
The domain name is not parked but forwards to an adult site, sexvideo.com
The complainant is SIX Group AG, whose official site is six-group.com.
You can read more about the SIX Group here
It’s another UDRP against a generic domain, in what’s becoming a long line of cases where a complainant can take a shot, buy a lottery ticket if you will, to get a six figure domain name for $1,500 with no downside.
Love it, consultants, mediators, and lawyers getting rich off the back of domainers, what else is new google?
Shouldn’t they be going after sixgroup.com, not six, shows their true colors right there… Reverse hijacking, should have a $25K fine, payable to owner of domain.
Tom
Good idea but there is no fine and no downside to the complainant and the owner of the domain has to pay to defend and also for the cost of the three member panel which they should get
At what point do enough of these types of UDRP filings finally result in real reforms to prevent this potentially catastrophic behavior?
I don’t see how anybody can claim rights over this name.
I totally agree with Tom and Michael on this one. Should be a fine for making such a silly claim.
Personally, I think there should be a screening process that ensures these claims cannot be brought forward. UDRP should be reserved for actual legal disputes on trademarked terms.
Anyone feel this is ruining the open nature of the Internet?
You only get as much justice as you can afford – to own domain like that means you have to be willing to defend against the wankers – and that is who this complainant is.
Xedoc has been involved in several UDRP’s and the company is associated with people involved with DomainTools.com. For instance, look at the dispute over MetArt.com where the panel found:
” But there is in this case far more direct, overwhelming and compelling evidence in the form of the emails with Sedo regarding the purchase of the Domain Name. In their un-redacted form they clearly show that Mr Viner was directly involved in the negotiations for the purchase of the Domain Name.” This was after the original submission had redactions that were not done correctly and the information was exposed.
When you get a reputation of doing stuff like this and pointing domains to porn sites you are posting a big bullseye on your back.
Another ridiculous UDRP complaint.
I hope they lose. I realize that udrp is ok in some circumstances but six.com? c’mon. You should be able to buy that domain, park it…make money from it any way you want.
Here we go again…
A domain owner with a valuable generic is now at the mercy of a panelist with no actually legal standing in a process that does not respect precedent.
Best case scenario is the owner has to spend thousands to defend it. Worst case scenario is he gets assigned some idiot like the Vanity.com case and the domain is stolen. Then it will cost thousands more to appeal to an actual court.
ICANN has had years to come up with with a reasonable common sense dispute process.
If you can’t trust them with a process like this, how can trust them with the new gTLD program?
Brad
Hello MHB
More and more Institutional investors are waking up to Virtual Business Foundations strategic values. Seems the Capitalists want to steal the pioneers Assets. The powers that be have open target practice through the disgraceful UDRP
process.
Our prediction is lots of lawsuits from original holders for obstructing their BRAND by these poachers. What comes around goes around and it will please me to see these thieves brought to their miserable knees.
Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)
what gets me also is that just because a domain is parked does not mean that a domain owner never has any other plans for a domain. Why should you need a plan anyway or defend your reasons for buying something.
Who is “our”, Jeff?
You keep phrasing a lot of your comments as though you’re speaking on behalf of some consortium.
The delusion deepens.
Come on Anon –
“our” is “(Contact Group)” & “(Metal Tiger)” & maybe those “howling and barking at the Moon”
Sounds familiar, try searching “Jeff Williams FAQ”
We hear/read these complaints over and over again, and it could be very demoralising for some. Complaining is pointless now, action is needed.
I don’t have the money, clout, connections, or expertise to challenge ICANN about the never-ending stream of these criminal UDRP’s, but there are quite a few big Domainers who do have these kinds of resources.
Can any of them stand up?
Or can any of them at least advise on how all us little guys can stand as one?
@tom… it should be $50,000. 25K to the domain owner and $25K to the arbitrator. nyuk nyuk nyuk. “There is not one human problem that could not be solved if people would simply do as I advise.”