David & Goliath: game.co.uk vs. GAME Group, PLC

srashdotu writes "The Register reports on a recent Nominet UK domain dispute, which ruled against the current owner of the "game.co.uk" domain in favour of the retail chain GAME Group plc. According to the article, 'The battle for Game.co.uk is unusual and highly significant for two reasons. Firstly, it concerns a generic and common word in the English dictionary -- "game." And secondly, Mr Sumpter [the registrant] was using the domain to run a video-game-selling business.' What makes this dispute different is the generic nature of the domain. 'both Nominet's DRS system and the ICANN UDRP approach have tended to recognise that no one has greater rights over generic names, names with a common meaning, than anyone else, so the owner is entitled to keep the domain. Equally, few cases have seen company pitched against company since they tend to see the sense in steering clear of each others' trademarks,' reads the article. Nevertheless, Nominet found against Mr Sumpter's right to the use the name 'game' (based in-part on Google search results!) and stepped firmly in to trademark territory to make the decision. Mr Sumpter has lodged an appeal, but if the ruling is upheld it could set a precedent that could see many legitimate owners of generic domains facing the threat of losing their livelihoods at the hands of corporate bullies."

Comments

Re:If you RTFA

[MarkGriz]

Maybe so, but FTFA

1. Procedural Background:
The Complaint was lodged with Nominet on 8 November 2004....

3. The Facts:

1. The Complainant is a company engaged in the retail sale of computer software and hardware including computer and video games through high street outlets under the mark and style GAME and online from the domain name game.net. It, and its predecessor in title Game Plc have been in business under the mark GAME since 1990.

From 1990 to 2004 is 14 years. Did these guys *just now* hear about "the internets"

Re:when being slashdotted..

[Blue Ray]

Here's a link to the archive.org snapshot

So he's used a domain which he's owned for ages to sell games and make some money. Big deal. The logo's different and couldn't be confused in a hundred years. If Game Group wanted it so bad theyshould have offered him a reasonable amount, instead the offers seem pretty pathetic - less than a year of game.co.uk's profit!

TBH, the 1,000,000 figure suggested to Game group is probably a bit low, given 60,000 annual profit and taking into account how much further profit a big outfit like Game Group would make on the same unit sales with their massive margins. They'd be looking at well over 100 grand. If a company's values at 10x annual profit, that's straight past a million.

Next they'll be suing anyone selling games that have the word game anywhere in there name - gamestation jumps to mind, but they're woned by blockbuster now. I doubt Game Group would have the bottle to fight against another heavyweight... :)