unix.com Wins Domain Dispute

kyler writes "Apparently unix.com was able to afford the lawyers to fight off X/open from stealing their domain name in the wipo domain dispute. If the domain unix.com doesn't violate the UNIX trademark, what gives them the right to take unix.net away from me and unix.org away from Michael? This is ludacris" We had the story about unix.org losing their battle so this is a Good Thing.

Comments

They have this backwards

[SpatchMonkey]

Although many cases of domain disputes are clear cut, such as the one between etoy and etoys, where one should be allowed to keep their domain, this is quite different.

You'll notice that the unix.com domain was registered by these people in May 2000. Obviously they knew the word "Unix" has been a trademark of the X/Open group for many years.

For them to register unix.com is incredibly misleading to anyone who may expect an offical Unix company website there.

The administrators of unix.org and unix.net have more rights to their domain names as they are not flying under the banner of a "Unix company".

So, it's another stupid domain resolution. They just seem to have it completely backwards!

Re:They have this backwards

[aug24]

If you read it properly, you'll note that the respondant company did not register the name in 2000.

The company bought the domain name in 2000 from the previous owner company. The actual human owner (of both companies and hence the domain) since 1993 has been Mr Tim Bass, who has continuously run a free speech Unix discussion site there.

Plenty of evidence that this is not a squat.

Justin.

Re:They have this backwards

[Hittite Creosote]

I didn't see anyone claiming it was a squat, merely that it was illogical. www.unix.com would (to most people anyway) indicate a company, and where one company has the trademark to unix, you'd expect to find them there. On the other hand, unix.org or unix.net would indicate non-commercial companies discussing unix. So to have the decisions go in the opposite direction indicates that the whole thing isn't decided by logic, it's not decided by who gets there first, it's decided by hordes of rampaging lawyers.

My favourite part:

[tuxedo-steve]

From the document:

The Complainant states that its mark is notorious and that the Respondent must have known about it.

They could have said `well-known'. They could have said `famous'. They could even have said `ubiquitous'.

They chose, `notorious'. That's kinda sweet. :)

Ludacris?

[martissimo]

This is Ludacris and i've never heard him mention unix while rapping... did you mean ludicrous perhaps? ;)

Important Domain Arb Safety Tip

[werdna]

Notice the dramatic difference here between results of three-judge panels (unix.com) and an individual arbitrator (unix.org). The published statistics show that single-judge arbitrations tend to be dramatically slanted pro-Complainant, with more balanced (but still generally proComplainant) results arising from a three-judge panel.

The Complainant gets to pick the arbitration house -- and will invariably pick the one with the strongest published pro-Complainant statistics. The respondant cannot challenge that choice, but under the rules may opt for the three-judge panel.

Message from Admin of Unix.com

[ende]

From Neo (Admin of Unix.com) on their forums:

A few facts:

* We registered the UNIX.COM domain in 1993 in good faith.

* We only registered UNIX.COM (UNIX.NET and UNIX.ORG were registered by others)

* We have spent well over $25,000.00 on UNIX related legal fees.

* We have spent many more thousands of dollars to maintain this site so that all people can freely discuss UNIX related issues without commericals.

* We have spent a lot of $$$ to promote free speech regarding UNIX and UNIX like operating systems.

* UNIX is a generic term regardless of X/Open's claim.

* X/Open's false claim hurts the world UNIX community because it creates a negative environment and fragments the community with harsh actions that are, in reality, anti-open.

* We do this because we love the UNIX philosophy and the true UNIX community.

This is my gift to you, each and everyone of you.

From the bottom of my heart. - Neo

Hah!

[Greyfox]

Notice the WIPO carefully not addressing the respondent's assertion that the word "UNIX" has become generic? It wouldn't do for that lot to effectively take a trademark away from someone. Why, if one of the outcomes of taking a complaint to the WIPO was that your trademark might be invalidated, people might stop abusing them so much. Lower case load equals less tasty UN funding. The WIPO likes its funds! They don't want that! So even though the respondent makes a damn good argument that the word "UNIX" has become generic, the WIPO just says "Oh we're not going to address THAT issue, but we'll find for the respondent anyway!"

The respondent makes a pretty good argument that the word "UNIX" has become generic and every computer professional I've ever known has used the word in a very generic fashion. I wonder if a preemptive lawsuit might be filed to have the trademark removed from the word...