Francois Carrillo, the guy behind Domaining.com, is getting ready to launch a new cash back program for bidding on his CAX.com domain marketplace.
The program will reward both the initial bidder in an auction and the second highest bidder with 2% of the sales price.
For example, if you are the first bidder and three people bid in an auction but you don’t win, you’ll get 2% of the sales price.
If you’re the first bidder in an auction that only attracts two total bidders, you’ll actually get 4% — 2% for being the first bidder and 2% for having the second highest bid. On a $1,000 sale this would mean $40.
If you’re the only bidder for a domain you’ll get 2% cash back since you were the first bidder.
The money is taken from CAX.com’s commission, not the sellers proceeds.
When I first heard of this deal I thought people would try bidding to earn money and walk away if they actually one. But CAX.com charges a one time membership fee that should reduce the incentive for people to do this.
The announcement about the cash back bidding is on a great domain in itself: Everytime.com.
The promotion begins July 4. Since Francois is French, I don’t think the timing has anything to do with the U.S.’s Independence Day holiday.
Having an online presence is critical for writers to market their work. In a recent blog post , author John Scalzi urged writers to purchase their own domain name online. Scalzi (pictured, via ) reminded readers that before Facebook, Internet users …
Futuris Automotive Interiors certainly has trademarks for Futuris, but for the automotive industry. The issue here was that it had full knowledge that the respondent didn’t register the domain in bad faith.
Respondent X9 registered the domain name 17 years ago in 1994 when it was called Futuris Networks, Inc. The complainant was well aware of that and alluded to the business in correspondence sent to X9.
After receiving no response to the correspondence, Futuris Automotive Interiors filed the complaint.
The three person panel wrote:
The Complainant made two principal assertions regarding bad faith: (i) that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of the Complainant; and (ii) that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name primarily in order to prevent the Complainant and/or the Complainant’s parent company from reflecting the mark FUTURIS in a corresponding domain name.
As the evidence provided by the Complainant itself showed, however, neither of these assertions had any basis in fact….
…it is clear to the Panel that the Complainant knew or ought to have known that the Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain name could not, under any fair interpretation of the reasonably available facts, have constituted registration and use in bad faith. The Panel therefore finds that the Complaint was brought in bad faith and constitutes an abuse of the administrative proceeding.
As a quick note to domain owners, the respondent may have been able to avoid this UDRP by responding to the complainant’s inquiries about the domain. Of course the complainant could have tried to use any response against it in a UDRP as well. It’s a double-edged sword.
WIPO panelist doesn’t bother to consider a sure-fire reverse domain name hijacking claim.
I realize UDRP panelists aren’t paid much to handle cases, but there must be a minimum standard here.
Why the frustration? Take a look at the recently decided case for Cite.com.
The owner of the domain name registered it in 1997 and started a business called Cité Consulting. The complainant Systemware, Inc. didn’t start using the term “CITE” in commerce until 2011.
I understand that Systemware may not have been aware that the domain owner had a consulting company using the domain name. But the 14 year difference between his registration and the company’s first use of the term is enough to make this case a complete joke.
The respondent rightfully asked for a finding of reverse domain name hijacking.
But in one of the shortest UDRP decisions I’ve ever read, panelist Christopher J. Pibus didn’t even bother to consider RDNH.
Amazon registers domain name flouting recent Consumer Reports rankings.
Earlier this month Consumer Reports released updated eBook reader ratings, declaring “Nook beats Kindle“.
That certainly didn’t go well with Jeff Bezos.
So the company just registered the domain name KindleBeatsNook.com.
When it comes to domain names, perhaps Consumer Reports should give Amazon a higher rating than Barnes & Noble. After all, no one (yet) has registered NookBeatsKindle.com. And no, I don’t think this is a trademark issue on a domain like this.
I’m not a fan of Consumer Reports’ ratings when it comes to newer gadgets, so I’ll stick to my Kindle…which I often times access via my iPad anyway.
Jothan has been in the domain name industry since 1994, and has helped launch numerous registries, registrars, TLD consultancies and domain conferences, and is currently a consultant in the New Top Level Domain name field, with deep experience and contacts in the domain industry and ICANN arena.