I need to get control of a domain name from the current registrant.

[PlatinumGold]

Oh btw, $700 is not a lot of money. your obviously not serious about this product of yours if your going to let $700 get in the way.

 

[rbhawcroft]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: rbhawcroft


rbhawcroft. i find your attitude more despicable than "Cybersquatting". first of all, the owners here aren't cybersquatting. they actually were at one point trying to run a business. they didn't do it knowing that you were going to trademark the name (it's not like registering ford.com or GM.com, a well known name.

also as far as he's concerned he's marketed the name for his product and you are going to benefit from that marketing. HE has every right to try and sell it on the open market, the fact that you invested money on your little product line w/o doing your DUE DILIGENCE first does not give you the right to bully him.

YOUR DISGUSTING.

you presumeably dont ahve to run a business. His investment is worth nothing. He has no interest in it other than forcing money from the next guy. Due Dilligence would prehaps say that I can get it from him.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Due Dilligence would prehaps say that I can get it from him.

No, if you had DONE YOUR DUE DILLIGENCE you would have seen that HE ALREADY HAD THIS DOMAIN NAME.

again, ur comparisons to CYBER SQUATTING are ridiculous and inaccurate.

 

[rbhawcroft]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Oh btw, $700 is not a lot of money. your obviously not serious about this product of yours if your going to let $700 get in the way.

why should I waste money at an early stage? anyway your idea of serious is sinking money into a venture before its even certain.

 

[PlatinumGold]

oh btw, i do run a business. when i came up with the name for my business i actually did a whois search before. i found that someone was already using www.xxxx.com so i called him asked if he had plans for it, he said he did, so i just registered www.xxxxservices.com.

so ur saying because he wasn't currently using it i could sue him for it?? how ludicrous.

 

[bsobel]

well cheers. you could see it that he is a squatter and using the fact that he has the domain name to force money out of me, and anyway you dont own a domain name you rent the right for it to reference your web site, and he isnt using it.

Your an idiot. He is not 'squatting'. Squatting would be if you already had a large well known business caleld 'AV-Networks' (which you don't), and maybe even had a trademark (which you don't). Then this person goes and grabs that name because you didn't think to do it yourself.

And just to clarify the thread for everyone else:

AvNetworks.com <-- Owned by some guy in Virginia since 1998. Hasn't asked for any more for it.
Av-Networks.com <--- Owned by some domain name company, they are the ones asking $688 (min) for it.

So, you won't go buy the name from the company willing to sell it to you, you just want to attack the guy who's owned it for 4 fricken years. Again, your an idiot.

Bill

 

[rbhawcroft]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Due Dilligence would prehaps say that I can get it from him.

No, if you had DONE YOUR DUE DILLIGENCE you would have seen that HE ALREADY HAD THIS DOMAIN NAME.

again, ur comparisons to CYBER SQUATTING are ridiculous and inaccurate.

well ill try and get it, and im pretty confident. Frankly I knew it was registered but like I said I thought it was attainable so I continued using the name I intended to use. Anyway its not bullying its just rational.

 

[PlatinumGold]

So, you won't go buy the name from the company willing to sell it to you, you just want to attack the guy who's owned it for 4 fricken years. Your a dick.

Not only is he a DICK he's a CHEAP DICK.

so you dont' want to invest money into it because your not sure of the venture, but your sure enough of it to sue someone else take his domain name from him and then have it fail.

do ur fvcking due diligence. do what it takes to find out whether or not you even have a chance at success before talking about suing some poor guy and trying to take something that is legitimately his away from him.

ONE MORE TIME. what he's doing is NOT CYBERSQUATTING.

 

[bsobel]

well ill try and get it, and im pretty confident. Frankly I knew it was registered but like I said I thought it was attainable so I continued using the name I intended to use. Anyway its not bullying its just rational.

Again, you have ZERO understanding of the law. Pick another name or get a .biz or whatnot address and move on.
Bill

 

[rbhawcroft]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
oh btw, i do run a business. when i came up with the name for my business i actually did a whois search before. i found that someone was already using www.xxxx.com so i called him asked if he had plans for it, he said he did, so i just registered www.xxxxservices.com.

so ur saying because he wasn't currently using it i could sue him for it?? how ludicrous.

Well Im going to have the trade mark, and he wants to sell. And he isnt intending on holding onto it. The brokerage dont really own it he does. He owned it for 4 yrs because he had a business with the name once. Its not suing its just using the law to force him to hand it over.

 

[PlatinumGold]

i know one thing for sure rbhawcroft. i'll never deal with you in fs / ft.

who knows what kind of stunt you'll pull. in every transaction there is some good faith. you show absolutely none of that.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

So, you won't go buy the name from the company willing to sell it to you, you just want to attack the guy who's owned it for 4 fricken years. Your a dick.

Wow your quick. I had some second thoughts on the wording and hit edit right away and changed it, oh well

 

[PlatinumGold]

yo bsobel

do you feel like we're lecturing to a 16 yr old that's determined to try and get things his own way, no matter what it costs?

 

[bsobel]

Well Im going to have the trade mark, and he wants to sell. And he isnt intending on holding onto it. The brokerage dont really own it he does. He owned it for 4 yrs because he had a business with the name once. Its not suing its just using the law to force him to hand it over.

I'm typing this slowly because you don't seem that quick. The trademark dispute policies for name registrants are for EXISTING trademark owners. You can not go get a trademark and then go after an existing registrant. If you owned the trademark in 98 you would actually have a case, getting the trademark in 2002 does not help you at all.

Bill

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
yo bsobel
do you feel like we're lecturing to a 16 yr old that's determined to try and get things his own way, no matter what it costs?

Yes. You know, I'm constantly amazed at the range of people I meet here. A lot are brilliant (regardless of age) and some are not the brightest bulbs in the batch....
Bill

 

[rbhawcroft]

Originally posted by: bsobel

well ill try and get it, and im pretty confident. Frankly I knew it was registered but like I said I thought it was attainable so I continued using the name I intended to use. Anyway its not bullying its just rational.

Again, you have ZERO understanding of the law. Pick another name or get a .biz or whatnot address and move on.
Bill

no dot com is the intuitive ending, in terms of the venture you can check my website out in a little while and see, the real first product is almost ready for prototyping and I picked the name as it was linked to the functionality of what the product line will be if it sells.

 

[PsychoAndy]

for all those commenting as to the irrationality and the stupidity of user rbhawcroft, have you noticed he does not do business in or reside in the wonderful jurisdiction of the U.S.?

as far as U.S. law is concerned, there is absolutely no way he can force the current owner to give up his domain. there is no way around that unless a purchase of this tangible item occours.

as far as U.K. law, maybe they have an anti-squatting statute in place where you cant buy a domain for the sole purpose of owning it. i dont know. oh, and WW, in the UK they commonly make the loser pay in legal actions, should rbhawcroft research the issue and decide to take action.

 

[LH]

Its NOT squatting, and there no chance in hell you would win.

 

[rbhawcroft]

well I often disagree with ppl.

anyway there only needs to be the threat of time and money for the guy to hand it over. if its not easy then maybe ill give up at least for a while, then the trademark case would be stronger, anyway im going to bed now so thats that for now.

 

[PlatinumGold]

psycho

the current owner is in Virginia, US. wouldn't that fall under US Jurisdiction?? you couldn't sue in britain to try and take property from an American. that wouldn't make any sense. if he wanted to take legal action it would have to be in the US. no?

 

[rbhawcroft]

i imagine there is a universal agreement. if i cant get it ill just have to use the main site entirely and i have that already registered, just not occupied as there is not point right now with no marketing going on.

 

[rbhawcroft]

Originally posted by: PsychoAndy
for all those commenting as to the irrationality and the stupidity of user rbhawcroft, have you noticed he does not do business in or reside in the wonderful jurisdiction of the U.S.?

as far as U.S. law is concerned, there is absolutely no way he can force the current owner to give up his domain. there is no way around that unless a purchase of this tangible item occours.

as far as U.K. law, maybe they have an anti-squatting statute in place where you cant buy a domain for the sole purpose of owning it. i dont know. oh, and WW, in the UK they commonly make the loser pay in legal actions, should rbhawcroft research the issue and decide to take action.

yeah but its not much in what are basically small value courts which usually decide in a few minutes, but he would have to prepare evidence etc. if i lost then id either dispute or forget about the domain and work around the problem, and andy I think you are wrong owners can be forced to hand then over esp if there are businesses involved.

 

[Russ]

I was going to smack this 'tard, but you guys haven't left enough of him to take aim at.

Russ, NCNE

 

[WombatWoman]

A couple of pimply, arrogant dorks said they were going to make legal trouble for me when I would not surrender my ownership of the domain name "mortalwombat.com" last year. They bombarded me with ridiculous harassing emails filled with empty threats and hilarious misspellings. In their view, they deserved to own mortalwombat.com, since one of them had used "mortalwombat" as a handle on the Internet for six entire months.

If I had been so inclined, I could probably have turned the tables on these dweebs and sent them squalling to their momma looking for sanctuary. As I have said, if the original poster seriously intends to try to strongarm his way into getting control of the domain name that he wants, he had better get an attorney. Either that, or he should start practicing the phrase "Yes, Bubba. Anything you want, Bubba. I'll get the vaseline and be right up to your bunk, Bubba."

 

[Chaotic42]

If you're a network, shouldn't you be .net anyway?