The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy Legal Information Site
Random header image... Refresh for more! Sells for $15K on NameJet & Goes For Over $8K

A few nice sales this last week at with leading the way at over $15K and selling for over $8K.

Here are the sales we tracked for the week: $15,088 $8,200 $5,599 $4,549 $4,500 $4,400 $3,550 $2,000

There were several three letter .com that drew bids into the mid $x,xxx range but none of them cleared reserve.

Not sure what the owner was looking for but random three without any meaning are only going to get a mid 4 figure bid at on a liquidation platform.…

June 18, 2012   No Comments

Sedo Releases Its List Of Top 10 Most Valuable New gTLD’s & .Shop Is Number 1 just released a list of what it considers to be the top 10 new gTLD strings.

According to a statistical analysis by Sedo, the top 10 most valuable domains being sought are:


“The analysis was calculated by economist, researcher and domain pricing expert, Thies Lindenthal. the creator of IDNX, the first scientific-grade domain price index.”

“Many factors make domains unique and difficult to compare side by side, but analyzing hundreds of thousands of domain transactions on Sedo’s marketplace – and applying real estate pricing methodologies – has provided significant insight into the factors that determine domain value,” said Lindenthal. “New gTLDs are actually not that new, they’re really just traditional domain names on steroids. We should evaluate their fundamental strengths in a similar way to how we traditionally price domain names.”

Cost Versus Value

“Considering the substantial cost associated with applying for and managing a new TLD, this research can help companies justify their potential investment by identifying extensions with the best chance of success. T”

“The cost involved in the new TLD process includes an $185,000 application fee, on top of a $25,000 annual fee and any operational costs that will be assumed by whoever is awarded the registry. In addition, gTLDs that have multiple organizations applying for them could go to auction, driving the cost up even more.”

“In addition to providing insight for companies competing to manage new TLDs, this ranking also gives end users a better idea of the domains in which they should invest their time and marketing budgets once the new extensions are launched.”

Research Methodology

“The ranking to predict new gTLD effectiveness is derived from a formula of five criteria that typically affect a domain’s value. Those criteria are:

  • Number of applicants for the new gTLD
  • Number of Google searches for keywords or terms within the new gTLD
  • Expected Cost-per-Click of online advertisements that include the gTLD as a keyword
  • Number of registered .COM domains that include the gTLD at the end of the keyword (e.g. as compared with My.Shop)
  • Number of preregistrations according to

“The first indication of which factor matters the most comes simply from counting the number of applications for each gTLD.”

“If there are a lot of investors trying to secure a particular keyword, it’s a strong indication that the word will be a valuable top level domain.”

“For example, thirteen applicants paid at least $185,000 trying to win .APP, indicating a high valuation.”

“For others extensions, competition is not as strong.”

“Only Google and Microsoft stepped into the ring to acquire .DOCS, for example.…

June 18, 2012   No Comments

How You Can Object To A New gTLD Extension & What Its Going To Cost You (Hint It’s Not Cheap)

So what if you want to object to a new gTLD string?

The first thing you should know is that not everyone can file an objection.

The second thing you should know is that filing an objection is not free, nor is it exactly cheap (pricing is at the end of the piece).

The cost to object varies depending on the basis for your objection, of which there are 4, and like the UDRP in some cases, if you want a hearing, how many panelists you want to decide on your objection, how long the hearing lasts and how many objections you have.

According to ICANN “The objection period for new gTLDs begins when the applied-for domain names, or strings, are posted and is intended to remain open for approximately seven months.”

“After the objection filing period closes, all objections received will move through the dispute resolution process, estimated to take approximately five months, in the absence of extraordinary circumstances.”

Filing an Objection

“An objection-filing period was built into the New gTLD Program as a way to protect certain rights and interests.”

“For example, if someone has applied for your brand or trademark, or perhaps you oppose a gTLD that targets a community in which you are involved, you can formally object to that application.”

“Filing an objection gives you the opportunity to have your objection considered before a panel of qualified experts in the relevant subject area.”

“Anyone with standing may submit a formal objection on any one of four objection grounds.”

“All objections must be filed directly with the selected Dispute Resolution Service Provider (DRSP), not with ICANN.”

“Below is a list of objection grounds, who has standing, and which DRSP to file with:

Objection Ground What it Means Who has Standing Dispute Resolution Service Provider
String Confusion The applied for gTLD string is confusingly similar to an existing TLD or to another applied-for gTLD string. If two confusingly similar TLDs are delegated this could cause user confusion.See section of the Applicant Guidebook. An existing TLD operator or a gTLD applicant in the same application round.See section 3.2.2 of the Applicant Guidebook. The International Centre for Dispute ResolutionICDR Fees[PDF, 18 KB]ICDR Rules[PDF, 18 KB]See section 3.2.3 of the Applicant Guidebook
Legal Rights The applied-for gTLD string violates the legal rights of the objector.See section of the Applicant Guidebook. A rightsholder.

June 18, 2012   No Comments

Div Turakhia At F.ounders Conference On Media.Net: “In The Next 12 Months We Will Likely Be One of The Top 10 Ad Companies”

The third annual F.ounders conference was held this past Friday at the Nasdaq’s MarketSite on Times Square.

One of the invited 150 founders was Divyank Turakhia of Directi which as we know has a bunch of companies in the domain industry and announced they applied for 31 new gTLD’s.

The sat down for a short interview with Div who they describe as a “30-year-old entrepreneur from India who started his first company at the age of 16 with $500.”

“Today he employs 800 people across two web-based businesses and has a net worth of about $350 million.”

“His latest venture, a “contextual advertising” company called, that matches online ads with related web content, is set to take on Google’s ad service when it launches fully later this year. ”

Div is quoted as saying:

“Google is the only company doing and they make $10 billion a year doing it. It’s a sweet business,”

“In the next 12 months we will likely be one of the top 10 ad companies out there”

“But when you’ve made your first million at the age of 18 and your first hundred million at the age of 23, what’s still driving you at 30?”

“It’s more about solving complex problems. That’s what keeps me excited. After a point you don’t care about the money at all. The reality is I would do all of this for free, but then people started paying me for it,” he explained.”


June 17, 2012   No Comments

What Ever Happened To Domain Hall Of Fame Member Sahar Sarid? We Know & It’s All On

Over the last couple of years I have had many emails asking me whatever happened to domainer Sahar Sarid.

Sahar is a member of the Domain Hall of Fame (inducted 2007).

Ron Jackson of ran a cover story on Sahar back in 2007.

Sahar published a very popular domain blog,

So what has Sahar been up to?

On the business front Sahar, recently sold the domain name, sometime last year.

“The domain name was bought in 2002 off of eBay by Ashantiplc, a company Sahar Sarid was a part investor in.

The domain was then leased to a HK development company and then as we said above sold to a new company sometime in 2011.”

This actual sale price and other confidential information continues to remain private between the buyer and seller.

Since the sale the of in 2011 the site has become one of the top 3000 visited websites in the world.”

On the personal front, Sahar has been busy traveling the world, from Thailand, Panama, Costa Rica, Tokyo, to Trinidad.

Another Domain Hall of Fame member Adam Dicker has put up a “Fan” site all about Sahar and his life at

As a much older guy than Sahar, I can’t say he has taken the wrong road.

Sahar made his mark while he was young and is now is enjoying his life to the fullest while he is still in his 30′s.

So I tip my hat as I’m sure you all do to Sahar, and wish him continued success and happiness.…

June 17, 2012   No Comments

Purchased For Less Than $2,500, Mike Mann Sells For $60,000

According to his Facebook Page Mike Mann’s has just had another really nice sale under his belt selling the domain name for $60,000.

I reached out to Mike who told me he acquired the domain name SkyBoard on April 5, 2007 for $2,446.79, a remarkable return by any measure.

The new owner of the domain name is SKYBOARD, Huu Huan Nguyen of Paris France who is yet to change the servers of the domain.

Mike wanted to let everyone know that he still have the plural version of the domain for sale.

Congrats to Mike and Mr. Nguyen.


June 16, 2012   No Comments

Rick Schwartz Wins The UDRP On & Get A Finding Of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

A three member panel not only ruled in favor of Rick Schwartz’s company on the UDRP on the domain name, but the panel found the complainant engaged in abuse of process amounting to Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

Mr. Schwartz was represented by Howard Neu, Esq.

Here are the relevant facts and findings:

“The Complainants are corporations incorporated in Brazil.”

“Since mid-2010, the Complainant has operated a daily deals website at “”. The site is branded “Save Me”.”

“On October 14, 2010, the Complainant filed an application for a Brazilian trade mark for the stylized words “save me” plus device (No. 903036983). That application is still pending.”

“The Respondent registered the disputed domain name on August 22, 1996.”

“On August 18, 2011, the Complainant’s lawyer emailed the Respondent from his personal email account stating that he would like to buy the disputed domain name for a “start up project” and asking for the “initial price tag”.

“The Complainant responded the next day stating “Well into the 6 figs.”

“On August 26, 2011, the Complainant’s lawyer inquired: “What about 10k?”.

To which the Respondent responded on the same day: “Not even $100k”.

On September 14, 2011, the Complainant’s lawyer emailed to put forward a final offer of US$ 50,000.”

“The Respondent did not reply.”

The panel in rejecting the claim said:

“There is a fatal flaw in the Complainant’s case, namely that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in 1996, some 14 years before the Complainant started trading in 2010, and could not therefore have registered the disputed domain name in bad faith.”

“Paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy requires the Complainant to establish that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.”

“The Complainant invokes various uses by the Respondent of the website at the disputed domain name since 2010 including for pornography and for pay-per-click links allegedly designed to capitalise on the Complainant’s reputation.”

“However, there is no need for the Panel to address any of these issues because, even if the Complainant establishes that the Respondent later used the disputed domain name in bad faith, and no matter how reprehensible such activities might be (as to which the Panel expresses no view), the Respondent still cannot show that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith.”

“Generally speaking, although a trademark can form a basis for a UDRP action under the first element irrespective of its date, when a domain name is registered by the respondent before the complainant’s relied-upon trademark right is shown to have been first established (whether on a registered or unregistered basis), the registration of the domain name would not have been in bad faith because the registrant could not have contemplated the complainant’s then non-existent right.”

“There is no need for the Panel to consider the other issues raised by the Complainant concerning bad faith including the alleged pattern of UDRP bad faith findings against Mr.…

June 15, 2012   No Comments

Your New Keyboard In The New .Brand gTLD World From Afilias

Thanks to our friends at Afilias who have a new take on the standard keyboard in the new gTLD world.

“This infographic of the bulk of major brands applying to ICANN for a new gTLD. (And, yes, this graphic covers all brands, not just ones that Afilias is working with.)

“We’ve also included some of the major geographic areas applying for TLDs; those are on the “function” keys.”

(you can click on the image to enlarge it)


June 15, 2012   No Comments

UDRP Panel Affirms Its Not The Forum For Recovery Of Stolen Domains As It Turns Down RareCoins.Com + 6 More

A three member panel just affirmed what we pretty much knew already that the UDRP is not a proper forum for the recovery of allegedly stolen domain names.

In this case, Austin Rare Coins, Inc. brought the UDRP to recover 8 domain names they alleged were stolen by a Hoa Nguyen.

The domains at issues were:

The panel rejected the Austin’s claim that they had common law trademark rights in the domains due to previous usage of the domain names for several years even through the domain holder did not even respond to the complaint.

The panel did find that the complainant had a registered trademark on the one domain and ordered that domain name transferred back to the complainant

Here are the relevant facts and findings by the panel


Complainant makes the following allegations:

1) Complainant owns common law rights in marks based on the disputed domain names through Complainant’s extensive and continuous ownership of the <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, and <> domain names.

2) Respondent registered the disputed domain names between March 30, 2012 and April 23, 2012 after unlawfully seizing the domain names from Complainant in order to harass Complainant’s customers.

3) Respondent intends to make a profit from the disputed domain names.

4) Respondent’s seizure of the disputed domain names is being investigated by a federal agency.

5) Respondent is not making an active use of the disputed domain names.

Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the marks based off of the disputed domain names and the domain names themselves.

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

“Complainant is the previous holder of the disputed domain names <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, and <> . Complainant used the disputed domain names in relation to the provision of information. Respondent has taken control over the disputed domain names and uses the disputed domain names to provide the same content as Complainant used to provide through these domain names.”

“Previous panels have held that a complainant need not own a national trademark registration in order to establish rights in a mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) if the complainant can demonstrate common law rights.

“Complainant claims to own rights in the ACOINS.COM mark, based on the <> domain name, through its extensive and continuous use of the mark and disputed domain name since September 2002.”

“Complainant alleges it maintained ownership of the disputed domain name until the time of Respondent’s seizure of the disputed domain names.…

June 15, 2012   No Comments

Our Chat With Demand Media About Their Apps For: .Airforce, .Navy., Republican, .Democrat, .Kaufen, .Moda, .Moto

We reached out to Demand Media, Inc. to get some more information on some of the new gTLD’s they applied for.

Leyla Farah was nice enough to respond on behalf of Demand.

Here is the email interview:

Q: There are some applications made by Demand that strike me as quite strange.

Can anyone chat about the thoughts and business plan behind the new gTLD’s Demand applied for like:



Are you doing these on behalf of the armed forces or with the consent of them?

If not don’t you expect objection to them from the armed forces?

Likewise the new gTLD’s applications for:



Don’t you expect those political; parties to object to the applications?


“””Our entire portfolio of gTLD applications were all grounded in the same data-driven process.

“We analyzed all of the data we could find to determine which words people were consistently using to navigate through their digital world.”

“Many of the most interesting words capture a universal sense of personal or professional identity, or are words that have come to define large and important ideas around the world. ”

“Ideas like “democrat” and “army” and “actor” represent global, vibrant communities that naturally gravitate to one another using shared language and experiences. ”

They are universal ideas that aren’t limited to any single entity like an armed service or political party in a single country — in fact they are often used generically (e.g., “Arnie’s Army” etc.). ”

“Because of the universality and generic nature of of these words, there really aren’t grounds for objection by anyone.”

“More information about the mission for these applications can be seen in question 18 of each of our ICANN new gTLD applications here:”

“I’ve also attached a document to this email that combines all of our Question 18 answers for your convenience.”


What are the thoughts behind





Finally I understand what a NINJA is, but whom do you expect to want to register, do business under or have the email address for .NINJA?


“Again, our strategy was to use data to unearth hidden gems.”

“We identified words that spoke to universal themes of identity, or words that have come to define a universal understanding of a concept. ”

“Strings like “ninja” and “moto” are a reflection of the evolution of language and culture itself.”

“These days, individuals with exceptional skills are commonly referred to as “ninjas” – no matter where they happen to live or what language they happen to speak.”

“The word “moto” captures the global phenomenon of motosport culture in a single word that transcends both language and geography.”

“Our data told us these types of strings represent some of the best available business opportunities precisely because they reach the broadest communities in the real world.”

“Importantly, the nature of the data also signaled to us that these kinds of names were unlikely to be spotted by others in the ICANN process.”

“Our website at gives some fun examples of that particular string in use.”

According to their application, Demand Media says about the extension .Kaufen”

“It is a generic and broadly used German word that holds particular affinity for people and organizations engaged in online commerce.:”

“Global in scope, today a passionate group of millions of consumers and hundreds of thousands of organizations identify with this word.”

“The mission and purpose of the .kaufen TLD is to establish an easily recognized and accessible namespace for the German-speaking portion of this large and dynamic group.”…

June 15, 2012   No Comments