Slashdot Mirror
Filing a Domain Name Dispute?
0backlash0 writes "I work for a not-for-profit that's involved in community media especially radio, television, and increasingly, the internet. We exist by and for the community, which is to say that we're not a large organization. Someone has registered a domain name that we used to own: kdhxfm88.org The name appears to be registered in "bad faith". Because of our size, we can't exactly afford to hire a team of lawyers to take care of this for us. What can we do and how do we do it?"
Your best bet is arbitration, since the domain pretty obviously has nothing to do with their real business.
Nothing for 6-digit uids?
I for one would have liked a warning that the current owners had set up a porn site on there. The post naturally makes one wonder what is currently on the site, and some people are going to check it out who would prefer not to end up at a porn site.
You already own kdhx.org, and if that's not enough, neither kdhxradio88.org nor kdhxradio.org nor kdhx88.org is currently registered. You don't really need kdhxfm88.org, so if you forget it, the squatter will have wasted his money.
(I see that he's put a porn pointer at the address . Is that what you're really upset about? That's a different question than the one you asked. If you're a nonprofit and you can't afford a lawyer, find out what `pro bono' means.)
-Tom Duff
How the fuck does this qualify as insightful? Let's look at it again, in instant replay:
"If you let the domain expire, and someone else registered it, I say you're going to have a hard time *taking it back* from its now-rightful owner."
No, he's not going to have a hard time taking it back, because according to ICANN's UDRP, these other people are acting in bad faith-- they are not the "rightful owner" that you mistakenly assumed. The rules are easy to search, and are here: http://www.icann.org/udrp/udrp-rules-24oct99.htm. But I'll quote it for you, since I'm sure no one will actually go read it.
Describe, in accordance with the Policy, the grounds on which the complaint is made including, in particular,
(1) the manner in which the domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
(2) why the Respondent (domain-name holder) should be considered as having no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name(s) that is/are the subject of the complaint; and
(3) why the domain name(s) should be considered as having been registered and being used in bad faith
So, seems pretty clear-cut here. Gee, you think the porn site's name isn't confusingly similar? You think they have legitimate interests in the name? You think they somehow weren't registering in bad faith?
As long as I'm apparently the only person who bothered to do some research on this first, including the original submitter, why don't I point out the procedures spelled out in detail here. Note that the single largest roadblock for a small non-profit is going to be the $1500 fee. Is the domain name worth $1500 to you? If so, read up, and you'll probably get it after a few forms and a money transfer. If not, use one of the gajillion other names available to you that's easier to remember than kzhszdfwelsdafjsdfzlldfm.org or whatever.
I remember a case where once the "squatter" offered to sell the name back to the owner, he lost all right to that name. So by offering the "buy this domain" link, they have forfeited there rights. Look here for more information. See the header "Bad Faith"
m.kelley
life is like a freeway, if you don't look you could miss it.
Ok, if you check out this comment you'll find out that the domain is owned by a company called Buy This Domain. And that they're listed as being in Armenia, but have an Idaho area code.
Now, I was browsing around google, and I came up with this WIPO doc, dated August 14, 2001.
It deals with a case sort of like the one mentioned here, where the complaintant (sp?) let the domain lapse for some reason, and another company bought it up. Ok, so I can hear you saying "What does this have to do with this case?" Simple, the defendent was Buy This Domain (then using a different street name, but otherwise the address is the same), seems after being given the notice that the domain was going to be disputed, they offered to give it back to the original owner. That's right, they gave it back.
So, although IANAL, I'd say just begin the proper actions against them, and see if they cave again.
"I won't mod you down - I feel the need to call you a twit explicitly, rather than by implication."
I think it's worse than that. He's probably putting up something that is specifically meant to be offensive and annoying, to further encourage KDHX (and other domains he registers) to pay him off. I doubt KDHX really cares about the domain -- they let it expire after all. But it's not that they don't get to use the domain, it's that the domain is offensive and slanders their organization. I think they would easily win any case against this guy -- not just to get back the domain name, but a libel/slander suit against him. If they were actually to try to do this, they would want to contact other people who have also suffered this extortion, to pool resources.
The server appears to just be on DSL (a traceroute stalls on netblock-66.51.198.150.dslextreme.com, which is probably some firewall just in front of his computer). Which makes it seem even less like a real porn site.
DSLExtreme is a DSL provider in California, apparently. From them you may be able to track down who registered the domain, who is presumably also hosting it. From there you can send a cease-and-desist letter directly to the actual owner, using his actual name, and not falsified information in the WHOIS database. Or if you really felt like it you could sue him (and more power to you).
Also, you can probably get DSLExtreme (whoever they are -- they seem like a normal sort of provider) to shut down his access. I somehow doubt the site fits in their terms of service. If nothing else that'll stop him for a while, and it'll annoy him.
I decided to let the name expire and then re-register it with a better registrar. I thought it wouldn't be a problem, because it was an obscure name.
Well, this same scumbag who took your old domain now has my old personal site, and is using it for porn ads. Apparently he is using a bot to repeatedly check for newly expiring domains, hoping to capitalize on the traffic from people's old bookmarks/search engine listings. I'm calling this "expire-squatting".
I filed a complaint with the FTC because of this and because he was using hostile "mousetrapping" javascript code to force open new windows whenever you close one. The FTC had previously shut down another one of these jerks, so I thought it might help.
Well, the FTC sent me back an email saying that they don't investigate individual complaints, but will act if they see a pattern of fraudulent behavior emerge.
So, go report this at the FTC website, and maybe you can push this over the threshold for FTC action.