Archive for January, 2012

BowlingBalls.com Sells for $225,000

Posted on January 29th, 2012 by AndrewHazenCom  |  No Comments »

According to Domain Name Wire, legendary domainer Gary Chernoff has sold BowlingBalls.com for $225,000 to Nick Melnikoff, who has bowled in PBA tours and owns Bowlers Paradise, a web site that sells bowling balls and accessories.

Recent domain sales within the past year for Chernoff include:

BlueJeans.com – $150,000
Ripley.com – $78,000
MoneyLender.com – $75,000

Not bad and certainly motivating!! Congratulation Gary!!

@AndrewHazen

Twitter Gets Typo of its Twitter.com Domain Name

Posted on January 26th, 2012 by AndrewHazenCom  |  No Comments »

A World Intellectual Property Organization panel has awarded Twitter the domain name Twittr.com in a uniform domain name dispute resolution policy (UDRP) proceeding.

Twittr.com was originally registered before Twitter’s “first use in commerce” date on its trademark for “Twitter”. Although Twitter says it actually started the service prior to this first use date, it was a moot point in this case because the current owner purchased the domain after the first use date.

The owner of the domain, identified as 21562719 Ont Ltd a/k/a Galt Networks Inc., did not respond to Twitter’s complaint. The registrant acquired the domain after Twitter purchased the Twitter.com domain name.

You can read the entire WIPO decision here

@AndrewHazen

Newspapers.com is For Sale

Posted on January 23rd, 2012 by AndrewHazenCom  |  No Comments »

The Wisconsin man who has owned Newspapers.com is selling the domain name and hoping to get up to $1 million for it. “[Francis Diederich] bought the domain back in 1994 or 1995 and always thought he would do something with it, but he never developed it,” says broker John Cribb, who is handling the sale. (The site is currently a newspaper website directory.)

“He turned down big money for it in the old days — he had offers of $750,000 and $1 million,” says Cribb. “My guess is that somewhere between $400,000 and a million is what he’d like to get now.” Cribb says newspapers.com appears as the first or second result in a Google search for newspapers. (The New York Times, he notes, owns newspaper.com.)

@AndrewHazen

Turn 90 Marginal Domain Names into $56,000 Per Month

Posted on January 19th, 2012 by AndrewHazenCom  |  No Comments »

The interview below is from Domain Sherpa…In this show, I shares how I turned 90 admittedly marginal hand-registered .com domain names and one .info domain into $56,000 per month. (The interviewee has seen the Google Adsense report to verify this impressive figure.) You will be surprised to learn that in addition to search engine optimization, a clever television ad campaign drove the results.

Enjoy the show and let me know what you think….

@AndrewHazen

Dallas Firm Sues ‘Doe’ Defendant Over Online Review

Posted on January 18th, 2012 by AndrewHazenCom  |  No Comments »

A Dallas firm has sued an anonymous “Ben Doe” who allegedly wrote a negative Google Review about the firm, a case that highlights the difficulties lawyers face when trying to address online comments.

The Lenahan Law Firm seeks to collect $50,000 from “Ben,” who wrote the review that reads, “Bad experience with this firm. Don’t trust the fake reviews here,” the plaintiff alleges in its petition in In Re “Ben Doe.”

“Discovery will include an investigation into the identity of ‘Ben,’ ” the firm notes, adding that a “subpoena will be served upon Google immediately.”

In the petition, filed Dec. 22, 2011, in Travis County’s 98th District Court, the firm alleges the review is defamatory because it “implies professional incompetence” and “alleges dishonesty and fraudulent conduct by the Plaintiff, though the ‘fake reviews’ were written by actual clients and are bona fide.” [See the Lenahan petition.]

Lenahan Law Firm partner Wes Black says he does not even think “Ben” was a client of his firm. The firm found a review of a cleaning company written by someone under the same online profile. Based on that, Black thinks the reviewer lives in Oregon, and the firm has never represented a person in Oregon.

@AndrewHazen

Richard Branson in .xxx Domain Dispute

Posted on January 17th, 2012 by AndrewHazenCom  |  No Comments »

Virgin boss Richard Branson is attempting to gain control of the domain RichardBranson.xxx.

The company took the action after an individual unconnected with the company registered the name.

“We have a complaint against the owner of RichardBranson.xxx,” a Virgin spokesman said.

The .xxx top-level domain launched last year after considerable debate. Virgin said it was spending an increasing amount of time protecting its brands, including the Branson name, online.

In order to win control of the domain Virgin has filed an application with the National Arbitration Forum, a body which deals with domain name disputes.

Virgin’s claim will turn on factors such as whether the original registration was in good faith and what legitimate interest the present owner may have to the use of the name.

I’ll let you know what happens…..stay tuned!

@AndrewHazen

Eddie Vedder from Pearl Jam tries to get EddieVedder.com Back

Posted on January 16th, 2012 by AndrewHazenCom  |  No Comments »

Pearl Jam frontman Eddie Vedder is trying to secure the web address EddieVedder.com. According to Fusible, a complaint (WIPO Case Number: D2012-0035) was recorded this past week with the World Intellectual Property Organization regarding the domain name. EV Touring, Inc., which owns the trademark of Eddie Vedder, is the complainant in the domain debate.

Fusible states that what stands out about this particular grievance is that according to WHOIS records, Pearl Jam owned the domain eddievedder.com in the mid-2000s through late 2010, at which point the domain name was transferred over to Whois privacy. So, Vedder perhaps forgot to make payment to keep the site, and somebody took notice and lapped it up, likely hoping to make profit.

Aftermarket, which is an online shopping space for various domain names, has EddieVedder.com listed for sale for at a steep $18,400!

Best of luck Eddie, I truly hope you get your name back and keep on rockin in the free world!

@AndrewHazen

Dot Kiwi applies for .kiwi domain

Posted on January 15th, 2012 by AndrewHazenCom  |  No Comments »

A group of Vancouver-based New Zealand expats has made an application for the .kiwi internet domain.

If Dot Kiwi’s application is successful, the new domain is expected to be available to individuals or organizations in early 2013.

Dot Kiwi says it will establish a fund from the sale of .kiwi domains to benefit the Christchurch rebuild.

A percentage of the revenue and profit before tax from the sale of .kiwi domains will be donated to a trust formed to receive, administer and distribute funds to Christchurch as they are earned and donated. The trust will be chaired by Sir John Hansen, a former High Court judge.

@AndrewHazen

Central Michigan University Continues to Buy .XXX Domains

Posted on January 13th, 2012 by AndrewHazenCom  |  No Comments »

Central Michigan University continues to buy up .xxx domains and recently completing its purchase of a third and waiting on final approval of a fourth…

In an effort to prevent adult companies from using branded names and trademarks, the nonprofit group Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) allowed universities, businesses and groups back in October, 2011, to buy up domain names that end in “.xxx”.  Since then, Universities across the country have raced to buy all related domains ending in .xxx. Adult websites have been known to use the image and logos of popular universities to create college-themed material. Under law, new adult websites are required to register their domains ending in .xxx.

The Detroit Free Press reported that CMU was among the first schools to snatch up .xxx domains, along with Penn State University, Purdue University, the University of Pittsburgh, Carnegie Mellon University and Indiana University.  The University of Michigan bought 21 .xxx domain names in December, 2011 as an effort to protect the school’s identity. U-M spent $28,000 to reserve 14 .xxx domain names, according to the report.

According to Steven Smith, the school’s Director of Public Relations, “The reasoning for the purchase is to protect the university from inappropriate use of its name.”  Smith went on to say that “in addition to protecting the CMU image, purchasing .xxx domain names will help prevent users from coming across adult websites while searching for university-related events or pages.”

Without a doubt, people will get confused and it appears as though Universities and businesses are proactively procuring brand and trademarked-related .xxx domain names as opposed to being reactive… Are you protected??

@AndrewHazen

US Court Rules Go Daddy is Not Liable for Cybersquatting

Posted on January 12th, 2012 by AndrewHazenCom  |  No Comments »

A district court in California dismissed a claim that Go Daddy was liable for cybersquatting. It also dismissed claims that Go Daddy was liable for contributory cybersquatting.

Cybersquatting occurs when businesses buy website domain names with the purpose of selling them on to trademark owners for a profit.

The court ruled that Go Daddy had not used the domains and was therefore not liable for cybersquatting under the terms of Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA).

“The forwarding of the disputed domains does not amount to ‘use’ of the domain names,” the district court in the northern district of California ruled.

“Domain name forwarding is a standard service that has been provided by Go Daddy and virtually all registrars for more than a decade. Go Daddy provides forwarding services for millions of domain names under its management, and has provided such service in combination with its other domain name routing services since 2002 or before. Go Daddy does not charge customers for domain forwarding, but rather offers this routing option as part of its registration services. Go Daddy’s registration customers, using Go Daddy’s dashboard, can configure the name server to forward a domain name to an existing website. This automated process is accomplished without any interaction between the registrant and Go Daddy personnel,” the ruling said.

“The evidence shows that Go Daddy simply provided the infrastructure to the registrant to route the disputed domains to the website of his choosing. Only the domain name registrant or the registrant’s authorized licensee can ‘use’ a domain name for purposes of the ACPA,” the court ruled.

I’m sure many domain registrars are breathing a sigh of relief with this decision…

@AndrewHazen