Buying/Selling a .IE Domain Name

ballooba

Has anyone got experience of this?

If so I would appreciate if you could PM me.

Looking for a bit of advice.

P.s. By buying I mean off a someone other than the IEDR.

astec123

Why would you pay over the odds for a domain name if all you get is tied into that set domain name, why not buy a proper .ie one or better still save money and buy a .com .info etc that will be cheaper and probably get more throughput than a .ie would.

ballooba

Well, consider the domain name ACME.ie which is owned by ACME Industries Ltd.

There are also three other firms which go by the name ACME:
ACME Ventures Ltd.
ACME Productions Ltd.
ACME Corporation Ltd.
all of which are equally entitled to the name under IEDR rules but on a first come first served basis.

The domain ACME.ie is attractive to all four companies but ACME Industries currently has title to it.

ACME Ventures Ltd. has recently patented their technology to turn water to oil and is now known as ACME Oil Ltd. ACME Oil is a lot bigger than ACME Industries Ltd. (which sells toothbrushes) and wants to buy ACME.IE

ACME Oil Ltd makes an offer to ACME Industries.

mneylon

You can change the ownership of an IE domain but you would need to check with the IEDR on the exact process.
Basically the new owner has to meet the criteria for ownership.

astec123

You must put a legitimate site on the address, you cannot legally squat on a site ie keep it to sell for profit. But I still dont see your point other than for squating.

mneylon

astec123 wrote:

You must put a legitimate site on the address.

Says who?

A lot of IE domains do not have websites associated with them and are completely legitimate.

ballooba

This is a million miles away from squatting. The company uses the domain for legitimate purposes and has a legitimate claim to it.

Have you ever experienced a situation like this blacknight?

ballooba

P.s. I didn't realise there was actually a company called ACME. That name was used for illustrative purposes.

[off-topic]I always thought that name was trademarked by animators or something[/off-topic]

astec123

Says who?

Its somewhere in european law, some guy bought cokacola.something or other and coke wanted the address, but the guy was squatting when they came to get the address the guy asked for a large sum and coke brought it to court, the guy got brought in and coke agreed to pay a smaller 5figure sum for the address, that brought about changes in the law to stop people cyber squatting and extorting legitimate companies. Not sure where abouts in the law its written but its there, the case got a lot of press.

mneylon

ballooba wrote:

Have you ever experienced a situation like this blacknight?

Sort of.
The original owner of the domain had passed away and his widow wanted to move the domain to a new owner.
I remember getting a detailed email from the IEDR explaining the exact process of moving the ownership, but of course I can't find it at the moment.

I know you can do it as long as the new owner of the domain meets the criteria, so I would highly recommend you ring the IEDR to get their advice.
They're usually very helpful

ballooba

astec123 wrote:

Its somewhere in european law, some guy bought cokacola.something or other and coke wanted the address, but the guy was squatting when they came to get the address the guy asked for a large sum and coke brought it to court, the guy got brought in and coke agreed to pay a smaller 5figure sum for the address, that brought about changes in the law to stop people cyber squatting and extorting legitimate companies. Not sure where abouts in the law its written but its there, the case got a lot of press.

Having studied IT law for a year i can assure you that the law is a lot more complicated than that.

mneylon

astec123 wrote:

Its somewhere in european law, some guy bought cokacola.something or other and coke wanted the address, but the guy was squatting when they came to get the address the guy asked for a large sum and coke brought it to court, the guy got brought in and coke agreed to pay a smaller 5figure sum for the address, that brought about changes in the law to stop people cyber squatting and extorting legitimate companies. Not sure where abouts in the law its written but its there, the case got a lot of press.

If you are going to make statements you should do your research to back them up.
Cybersquatting of a trademark name would be covered by WIPO.
Demanding money in the case of a domain name would leave you wide open to being accused of "squatting" and has come up more than once in the past.
It would be a different matter if you registered a domain "in good faith" and a trademark holder had issue with it.
Also, just because there is no website running on a domain does not mean that the domain is not being used or that the registration was in bad faith.

In the case of a managed registry, such as the IEDR, the likelihood of squatting is greatly reduced and the possibility of trademark abuse is almost neglible.

astec123

If you are going to make statements you should do your research to back them up.

It was in the papers and I quite enjoyed the off the beaten track of the matter.

Cybersquatting of a trademark name would be covered by WIPO.
Demanding money in the case of a domain name would leave you wide open to being accused of "squatting" and has come up more than once in the past.
It would be a different matter if you registered a domain "in good faith" and a trademark holder had issue with it.

I know this, but from what I was hearing I beleive the OP is discussing just that and I am warning against it, what is cybersquatting exactly, like many laws its vague.

Also, just because there is no website running on a domain does not mean that the domain is not being used or that the registration was in bad faith.

I know I have set up sites in the aim that I would load up a site eventually but never get round to it, I am merely trying to warn over the implications of what I feel the OP is infering that they plan to do.

ballooba

astec123 wrote:

It was in the papers and I quite enjoyed the off the beaten track of the matter.

There is substantial case law relating to Cyber Squatting in both European and US law. Significant cases would be Glaxo PLC Vs Glaxowellcome Ltd. or Marks and Spencers and others Vs One In a Million Ltd. If you craed to do your research there is plenty of material available.

As far as I am aware there hasn't been a case yet in Ireland. Such cases would most likely be governed under the 'Tort of passing Off' as they are in the UK.

astec123 wrote:

I know this, but from what I was hearing I beleive the OP is discussing just that and I am warning against it, what is cybersquatting exactly, like many laws its vague.

In a nutshell cybersquatting is registering a domain name with bad faith intent to profit.

astec123 wrote:

I know I have set up sites in the aim that I would load up a site eventually but never get round to it, I am merely trying to warn over the implications of what I feel the OP is infering that they plan to do.

I didn't infer that I am planning to do anything.

ballooba

P.s. I'm not sure where the WIPO decisions come into play. The IEDR has an agreed Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy which states that disputes will be referred to the WIPO. I'm not sure which has the final say out of the Irish Courts and the WIPO.

mneylon

astec123 wrote:

I know this, but from what I was hearing I beleive the OP is discussing just that and I am warning against it, what is cybersquatting exactly, like many laws its vague.

What exactly is vague? If you infringe somebody's trademark there is nothing that vague about it.

What exactly is this "OP" you refer to?

mneylon

ballooba wrote:

P.s. I'm not sure where the WIPO decisions come into play. The IEDR has an agreed Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy which states that disputes will be referred to the WIPO. I'm not sure which has the final say out of the Irish Courts and the WIPO.

WIPO presumably, if it was a case of trademark breach.

impr0v

blacknight wrote:

What exactly is this "OP" you refer to?

presumably Original Poster.

jmcc

astec123 wrote:

Why would you pay over the odds for a domain name if all you get is tied into that set domain name, why not buy a proper .ie one or better still save money and buy a .com .info etc that will be cheaper and probably get more throughput than a .ie would.

Well the .com would be cheaper. The .info is a toy tld where only 300K websites are active out of about 3.5 Million domains. For marketing to Ireland, a .ie and .com would be useful.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

astec123 wrote:

It was in the papers and I quite enjoyed the off the beaten track of the matter.

Most of the "technology journalists" writing in the Irish media have no comprehension of Intellectual Property law issues. In fact I've seen a number of them make fundamental errors when writing about such things. It is very dangerous to rely on what these people write when it comes to domain names or technology.

Regards...jmcc

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

steve-hosting36

Only if they can demonstrate the domain was registered by the current holder to profit by the registration.

If you have a trademark for 'widget' and someone who trades as 'Widget' gets the domain first, then tough luck

mneylon

Solitaryman666 wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Have a look at:
http://www.iedr.ie/IEDRP_Launched.php