Results 1 to 20 of 33
Hybrid View
-
06-06-2011 #1
You really need to show clear trademark or copyright infringement for there to be any chance whatsoever. To be clear, in this case the ownership of the domain did not expire and then the "cybersquatter" immediately bought the domain rights. Nor is there any apparent previously filed trademark or copyright which was filed prior to the purchase of the domain. In this case it appears as though the only real resemblance to what is called "cybersquatting" is the fact that the domain owners are attempting to profit by offering the sale of the domain at an "inflated price", however this is only one of the required elements to be considered a vioation of the ACPA or UDRP. Because the domain ownership already exists, filing for trademark or copyright at this juncture will provide no effect on the outcome. Furthermore, absent specific trademark or copyright infringement, the existing precedent is that courts will uphold the ownership of the domain name in the US. It's just an unnecessary black hole that you'd pour legal fees into in attempts to get control of a domain name that frankly just isn't necessary. Optimization along with all the existing content on the current "Pro-Touring.com" domain make any such efforts a crazy investment of time, resources and energy that will never return value. Like I said, I work with this stuff every day.
'66 GTO Vert Project "Red Ink", 462ci of stroked pontiac power, TKO600, SC&C Stg II+, Tubular lowers, Currectrac Rear suspension, Moser 12bolt w/Truetrack, Wilwood Master and discs all around, too much fun for words...
-







Reply With Quote



