Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

WIPO Awards 'Sucks' Domain to Vivendi

Posted by michael on from the yet-another-travesty dept.

Sarcasmo writes: "A WIPO Panel has decided in favor of Vivendi Universal in the dispute over VivendiUniversalSucks.com. The arguments made on Vivendi's behalf are strange, to say the least." It's so unjust as to be farcical. When the domain name holder makes a sarcastic comment that he wasn't making any money off the domain (in contrast to the lawyer who was billing a few hundred dollars per hour to handle the dispute), the esteemed Panel takes that as evidence that he wants to sell the domain (which in itself was already a flimsy plank to call "bad faith"). Kangaroo court is too kind a description. ICANN is currently asking for input on the domain dispute resolution process, so if you've been a victim of the UDRP, now would be a good time to speak up.

20 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. Time for some new domains... by YuppieScum · · Score: 3, Offtopic

    I think it's time for...

    vivendiuniversalreallysucks.com

    and maybe even

    wiposucks.com

    --
    This sig left unintentionally blank.
    1. Re:Time for some new domains... by psaltes · · Score: 5, Interesting

      well, the com version seems to be owned by sucks500.com, a bulliten board for complaining about things related to corporate america. Wholly appropriate considering that Vivendi probably bought this case. The version is owned by someone upset about a previous dispute that was arbitrated by WIPO, and has a fair amount of information relevent to this case (procedures, etc). Perhaps they would be interested in putting up information on other cases as well.



      I have to wonder (conspiracy time) if WIPO wants to set up precedents to have these sites taken down, as well as ICANN itself removing anti-icann sites. (icannsucks.com is also owned by sucks500.com) In fact, there are a lot of people with a lot of money who would be happy if these sorts of sites were given more trouble than private individuals can reasonably deal with. It appears that the group which owns the two .com sites has resited some lawsuits, but how long can they last?

    2. Re:Time for some new domains... by BarefootClown · · Score: 4, Funny

      Perhaps asswipo.com?

      --

      "Make it ten--I am only a poor corrupt official."
      --Captain Louis Renault (Claude Rains), Casablanca

  2. I am so confused... by DaoudaW · · Score: 4, Funny

    stating that the addition of the terms "sucks" and ".com" to the Bloomberg mark does not have the effect of escaping confusing similarity

    "Microsoft sucks"
    "Why do you like MS?"
    "Huh??? I hate MS?"
    "Oh... It's all so confusingly similar."

  3. What we really need by ywwg · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You know ICANN took all this time to mull over new top-level domains, why don't they add ".sucks"? They could stipulate that no one owning a copyright for a name could buy the .sucks domain, and then all of the webmasters with grudges would have their own little playground to make fun of companies. Because all of the domains end in .sucks, they could not be "confusingly similar" to the original since everyone would know what the purpose of the .sucks domain is.

    then this guy could buy vivendiuniversal.sucks, and everyone would be happy.

    1. Re:What we really need by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Interesting
      • Because all of the domains end in .sucks, they could not be "confusingly similar" to the original since everyone would know what the purpose of the .sucks domain is.

      Nice try, but at the core of UCANT's rulings is the principle that Jane Surfer is a dribbling AOL-Time-Warner-Microserf who is too stupid to figure anything out and needs to be protected from her own idiocy.

      It's not just the "bad guys" who're abusing this. The Worldwide Fund for Nature, nee the World Wildlife Fund (and still known as that in the USA) has won the right to wwf.com, on the basis that the World Wresling Federation name and page is "confusingly similar" to the Worldwide Fund for Nature, and Jane Surfer might get all puzzled and donate her money to the wrong organisation. I kid you not. This is currently under appeal, and for once, I'm on the side of the Rock.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  4. The Bastards! by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm going to vote them all out in the next election! Oh... Wait...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  5. Bad faith by YuppieScum · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If Disney hold on to this domain to prevent it's use for "fair comment" criticism, can we take it from them citing "bad faith"?

    --
    This sig left unintentionally blank.
  6. Media Monopoly by spamkabuki · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know this will piss some (many) people off, but I often find these domain name spats touchingly irrelevant.

    In the long term, will domain name shortage be a real and continuing problem?

    Just putting ...sucks... on a domain doesn't offer much in the way of real criticism. Effective activism isn't as easy as calling people names. If it's just a prank, then isn't all the hoopla a bit overblown?

    Corporate dominance of public discourse is not a new problem. All the free access to domain names in the world will not overcome the fact that most of what most people see/read/hear is controlled by a relatively small group of greedy people. The world is poorer for it, but this is old news.

    Try reading some pulped tree products for a great discussion of these problems. I'd start with Ben Bagdikian's classic, The Media Monopoly-- http://www.commoncouragepress.com/bagdikian_monopo ly.html
    You'll find some more pressing media control issues than "...sucks.com".

    --
    Sig?
    Sigue Sigue Sputnik!!!
    1. Re:Media Monopoly by sconeu · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey, that's a great way to catch Osama! Put up the site at terrorismsucks.com, and then wait for him to sue you in WIPO!

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  7. That would be justified if... by brunes69 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...non-english speaking people would be going to the VivendiUniversal.com site in the first place. Since the whole site is English, I highly doubt that.

  8. Customer Confusion by Happy+Monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To avoid customer confusion, the owner of a domain name should be required to put up a page at that domain that is appropriate to the domain name. Someone putting up a pro-Vivendi site at a "Sucks" domain is obviously attempting to trick customers into thinking that Vivendi does not suck.

    --
    __
    Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
  9. On Primus and Sucking... by VValdo · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The WIPO panel goes so far as to insist that because the band Primus owns the domain name primussucks.com (named after their 1990 album "Suck on This"), prospective visitors to vivendi.com might get confused about who's who.

    Well, kinda. Back in the late 80s/early 90s, Primus fans used the term "sucks" in an ironic fashion. It was kind of an inside joke -- ie, Primus fans would have bumper stickers that said "PRIMUS SUCKS", t-shirts etc. It was a heavily sarcastic way of showing your fanness, typical of the early 90's rejection of corporate culture (grunge, etc.-- Ah, take a moment to remember the glory days before all TV and advertising was wry and tongue-in-cheek and corporate marketers didn't know how to handle "Generation X".)

    Seeing as it was originally a joke slogan meant to confuse non-"true" Primus fans, it makes no sense to use it as an example of how the general public might get confused-- that was the whole point!

    W

    --
    -------------------
    This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  10. Did ANYONE read the decision? by Rev.LoveJoy · · Score: 5, Informative
    Did anyone read the WIPO decision? The whole thing? Down to the part that says ...

    It is common ground that no use was made of the disputed domain name between the date of registration, February 27, 2001, and the date when notice of the dispute was given to the Respondents by way of "cease and desist" letter on July 26, 2001.

    That's right, it was dead space. The whole redirect to geektivism is ex post fact, folks. Capitolizing on /. eyeballs, if you will.

    While I think the WIPO decision is a laughable miscarriage of Justice*, I do find it a bit difficult to feel really high and mighty and start saying, "oh, how terribly awful." Even the fellow who registered the thing seems to have a good sense of humor about this whole joke.

    Personally, I would wager that he's feeling the same way I am about the whole charade. Vivendi's response and the fact they actually convinced WIPO to give them the domain name is really just prooving this guy's point.

    Cheers,
    - RLJ

    * Justice? These guys are lawyers, come on now...

  11. Re:There are merits here... by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 3, Informative

    Because what you suggest isn't protecting trademarks. No, you can't start a store called "McDonald's Sucks". Yes, you can put up a sign saying "McDonald's Sucks" and tell people why you think they suck. You can't spread falsehoods, but if you stick to the truth McDonald's can't legally touch you.

    This is the fallacy that the UDRP falls into: the assumption that only trademark gives a valid claim to a name. It's what leads to decisions that a person doesn't have the right to use their own name for a Web site about themselves.

  12. ICANN -- Just say "No, thanks" by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 5, Informative

    So stop whining already and point your name client at OpenNIC, the non-ICANN name space. (Of course, OpenNIC includes the ICANN name space as a subdomain).

  13. That ruling was worth reading... by softsign · · Score: 5, Informative
    ... just to find this from dissenting panelist David Sorkin:
    "As the majority suggests, there may well be some narrow categories of trademarks for which the word "sucks" does not clearly disassociate a domain name from the trademark, and therefore it may be unwise to adopt a per se rule holding that "sucks" domain names can never be found confusingly similar to the trademarks they contain. But the Complainant in this proceeding does not claim to be known as a manufacturer of vacuum cleaners or suction pumps, or as a self-deprecating alternative rock band, or a test laboratory for beverage straws, or a porn star, a black hole, or any other sort of entity that people are likely to associate with sucking. And even if the Complainant did fall within one of these categories, it would still bear the burden of proving a likelihood of confusion."

    Bravo!

  14. For those who lost their "sucks" domain by kindbud · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'll offer a delegation from my 2nd level domain, so for example, the domain that was taken from "j d sallen" can be replaced with the one I am offering: vivendiuniversalsucks.thekindbud.com.

    Someone who is more enterprising than myself could set up some more 3rd level delegations, like vivendiuniversalsucks.mydick.com, vivendiuniversalsucks.greencanalwater.com, vivendiuniversalsucks.theyjustsuckperiod.com, and so on...

    WIPO and ICANN have no authority over 3rd level delegations, as far as I know. But that might be an interesting battle if they were to try to take away a domain that was used in this way.

    --
    Edith Keeler Must Die
  15. Re:There are merits here... by wytcld · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If I decided to call my bookstore "Barnes and Noble Bites" should I be forced to pick a new name? Yes.

    If I title a magazine article "weez75 Sucks" you'd come after me? I'm not selling what you're selling in competition with you, I'm just reviewing your business and character. If we get to a world where it infringes your property to mention your name in a noncomplimentary context, then, weez75, because you will have helped in your insignificant way to get us there, what I'll do if I catch up with you will also be unspeakable.

    --
    "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
  16. Re:There are merits here... by Malcontent · · Score: 3

    "Telling the truth is not a legal defence. If you have enough money - as McDonalds did - then you get to write your own laws."

    Unfortunately you are right. This day and age a common person has no options other then violence. If the courts are corrupted, the politicians are corrupted, the media is corrupted what else is there to do except take arms (or chemicals or bacteria).

    --

    War is necrophilia.