@Domain you are right, the fact that a UDRP was filed 2 years before the auction for wi.com was not fake. That is true and was already public knowledge. In fact there were already two articles written about it on TheDomains previously (both by Michael even though he denied ever knowing about the UDRP). However, the context in which it was written and the other details in the article were FAKE. Fake meaning NOT TRUE. Fake meaning inflammatory. Fake meaning derogatory. Fake meaning damaging. Also the timing in which is was written is more than conspicuous.
Now, go read that new German law and interpret for yourself if what I’m calling “fake news” applies to Michael’s post. Or simply read the facts that I laid out above in my prior comment. Those are FACTS. Indisputable facts. Evidenced through multiple legal opinions and actual factual evidence such as not only the winning bidder, but 3 other bidders as well, stating IN WRITING that they did not bid (or pay the winning bid) because of the article, which was inherently false.
The premise of the article is FAKE. The winning bidder of wi.com is in absolutely no greater risk of a subsequent UDRP because of the prior UDRP. The fact is, every single two letter .com domain has existing registered trademark (most have MANY!). If you abuse it, you put yourself at risk. If you abuse it, you are an idiot. But a prior UDRP which we won, does NOTHING to decrease ones rights in the domain as a subsequent registrant. It all comes down to use and abuse. WI.COM is a generic domain name and generic two letter acronym that among other things is the state abbreviation for Wisconsin. That ladies and gentlemen is the issue at hand.
We just acquired the domain name impala.com. Now clearly there is a trademark from General Motors for their car model “Impala”. Does that mean that impala.com is a high risk domain? Absolutely not. Not unless I try to sells cars on Impala.com or do something else stupid that infringes on someone’s trademark. “impala” is an animal. It can be used for an airline, ice cream shop or whatever the hell I, or anyone else, want to use it for as long as it doesn’t infringe on someone’s mark. There could have been 25 previous UDRP’s on Impala.com or WI.com for that matter and it would make absolutely no difference to the value of the domain or its risk potential (as long as the respondent won in all the prior UDRP’s as we did in wi.com case). In fact, I would argue that it make the domain MORE attractive. It clearly shows the domain as valuable. It clearly enhances our rights in the name. It clearly shows that there are 3rd parties that want to own this name and are willing to spend money to try and steal it from us. Many times a poorly intended UDRP results in a large sale as a settlement after the complainant fails.
If you don’t understand that the premise of the wi.com article was inherently fake because it was based on false rhetoric and statements, then you are hopelessly and willfully destined for failure anyhow.
If you think for one second that you are going to be successful in domain investing and never buy a domain name that has a registered trademark, then you have ZERO chance of success. Just quit now, otherwise you’ll just look like a public fool like @striker and @rich and @jose. Class clowns and the joke of the town. The ONLY domains which are of any inherent value are ones which are generic in nature and have existing trademarks. If a keyword or acronym has any value then SOMEONE has already trademarked it for SOMETHING. But that doesn’t mean it can’t be used for something else. Domaining 101.
This latest Domain News has been posted from here: Source Link