Archive for International Domain News for $1,000, for $1,500 is that something you might be interested in ?

MONDAY,24 AUGUST 2015 The Domains
According to the news from on August 24th,if you are interested we need a time machine to go back to 1998.

Namepros member Hookbox dug up a blast from the past that looks at some big time names for very cheap prices. Of course the timeframe was 1998 and not many understood the value or potential of domain names like Rick Schwartz did.

The archive is from

Domain Name Price (USD)
CURIOS.COM $ 1,000
DISKS.COM $ 3,000
SLACKS.COM $ 1,500
TUBS.COM $ 1,000

Lawyer Gerald M. Levine Writes The Definitive Book on UDRP’s

MONDAY,24 AUGUST 2015 The Domains
According to the news from on August 24th,at well over 500 pages, Gerald M. Levine who is an attorney, and sits on panels of neutral arbitrators for the American Arbitration Association for commercial and IP disputes, has written the definitive book on the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, (UDRP).

The book is entitled “Domain Name Arbitration: A Practical Guide to Asserting and Defending Claims of Cybersquatting Under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy”

Mr. Levine ” describes the book as an important, thorough and incredibly helpful guide for navigating the UDRP” and in my opinion it certain is a must read for anyone in the domain space, including a ton of lawyers who don’t seem to know a whole lot about UDRP law but file or defend complaints.

The book is also described as being is the most comprehensive and in-depth work on the jurisprudence of domain names

The foreword was written by the Honorable Neil A. Brown, Queens Counsel in Melbourne, Australia who is a UDRP panelist.

The book can be purchased on and is currently ranked as the best-selling book on Amazon on trademark law.

You might not think that UDRP law is a subject that one could write over 500 pages on, but between 2000 when the first domain name case was decided and 2015, there have been over 45,000 decided cases under the UDRP.

In an interview with Mr. Levine shed some additional light on this book and some thoughts on the UDRP process.

Mr. Levine is a big believer in the UDRP system which he describes as affording “any trademark owner, anywhere in the world a remedy against any domain name holder, anywhere in the world. The UDRP transcends territorial legal jurisdictions and that’s what’s so remarkable about it.”

The reason that trademark owners lose UDRP cases fall into three categories.”

“First, are those who fail to understand the evidentiary demands for prevailing under the UDRP and present insufficient or no evidence of bad faith.”

“The second category of owners consists of those with weak trademarks composed of common elements that domain name holders are lawfully allowed to register and use as long as they have not registered the domain names with the intention of taking advantage of the trademark owners. ”

“The third category consists of trademark owners who concede priority or derive their rights from distant jurisdictions but claim to have the “better right” to the disputed domain name because they are offering “real” goods or services whereas the domain name holders are only monetizing their websites. Measuring distances, incidentally, whether temporally, geographically, and by goods/services offered by each of the parties, is a significant factor in determining whether there’s been an abusive registration.”

Mr. Levine insists that even with trademark holders winning 85%+ of UDRP “it’s a common misconception that the UDRP is biased in favor of trademark owners. ”

“There is also a popular misconception that the UDRP isn’t working. This criticism is against panelists who follow their own beliefs of what the law should be rather conforming to established law, and this has happened in some recent cases where panelists take the position that the law doesn’t require them to find conjunctive bad faith, but the domain name can be forfeit in their view if there is bad faith use after renewal of registration. ”

“Again, this is not the law. ”

From his interview, its clear Mr. Levine would prefer if there was a way to appeal a UDRP decision saying “the regret here is that there is no administrative appeal from these decisions, but it’s up to ICANN to amended the UDRP to provide for appeals”.

“If there’s a trademark infringement it belongs in federal court. Some panelists want to remake the UDRP to be an administrative version of the ACPA. This is a huge mistake in my opinion.”

For domain owners, Mr Levine recognizes that the are “cases of abusive process in which newly minted trademark owners are initiating complaints against domain name holders who have years of priority recognizing that the abuse is not always by the domain name holder.”

“It is important to understand that holding domain names for sale or using them to generate revenue as search sites is not unlawful even though they may be identical or confusingly similar to trademarks.”

As for the most contentious issue in UDRP land Mr. Levine said “”has been the attempt by a few influential panelists to change its construction to allow for forfeiture regardless of good faith registration if domain names are subsequently being used in bad faith.

This view, which hasn’t really gotten anywhere and to my mind is a dead end, attempts to bring the UDRP into alignment with the ACPA.

Nevertheless, there are some anomalous decisions sometimes by dissenting panelists that go to great lengths to explain the reasoning behind the view.”

“Another contentious issue is the use of domain names for commentary and criticism. What exactly is protected? Is it the domain name or the speech on the website? Some panelists hold that domain names identical or even confusingly similar to trademarks are not protected speech.

“Domain names may be protected if trademark are incorporated into strings that includes pejoratives such as “sucks.” Other panelists, particularly from the U.S. favor protection of domain names as well as content. Even alleged defamation is not enough to favor forfeiture because adjudicating whether material is defamatory is outside the scope of the Policy”.

To read the entire interview with Mr Levine with please click here

GERALD M. LEVINE is the managing Partner at LEVINE SAMUEL LLP, in New York City. He is on the panel of neutral arbitrators for the American Arbitration Association for commercial and IP disputes and a mediator for the Commercial Division of the New York Supreme Court, New York County; and the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. He has published numerous articles on real estate, arbitration, trademark and cybersquatting. Mr. Levine earned a Ph.D. from New York University and a J.D. from Brooklyn Law School.

Auto Zone Demanding Small Business Change Name and Give them their Domain Names

MONDAY,24 AUGUST 2015 The Domains
According to the news from  on August 24th,here is an interesting story on, Cycle Zone Motorsports & Marine is a family owned Arizona business that has been around since 2012. Auto Zone sent the company a letter demanding they change their name and hand over their domain names.

Your use of a name and mark that included the term ZONE to engage in services that overlap with those offered by AutoZone under its ZONE Marks is likely to confuse customers into believing that your business is associated or affiliated with, or sponsored or endorsed by, AutoZone,” wrote Galen Colbert, trademark administrator for AutoZone.

Bill Hamm the owner was quoted, “They seem to be going after smaller companies,” “They’re strong-arming local businesses.”

The Daily Courier contacted a California man who was told in 2013 he needed to stop running his business under the name USA Motozone. Radi Mintchev of San Diego, a plumber by day, runs the website that sells motorcycles, bicycles, parts and accessories.

“It’s unbelievable,” he said. “They’re trying to shut down all the websites containing the word ‘zone.’”

But two years after receiving the letter, Mintchev’s site is still running under the same name, and he has no plans of complying with AutoZone’s request.

“They can try,” he said. But he believes his company is distinct enough that he’s not interfering with AutoZone’s business.

The Daily Courier pointed out that Auto Zone has not one every time out they tried to strong arm another company.

AutoZone has had mixed success suing businesses that use the word “zone” in their name.

In 2005, the company lost a suit in federal court against Delaware-based Tri-State Auto Outlet Inc. for their use of the name Car Zone at a dealership since 1997.

AutoZone also lost a similar case in Illinois to a company using the names Wash Zone and Oil Zone, though AutoZone later won on appeal.

Originally known as Auto Shack, the company changed its name to AutoZone in 1987 to settle a 1982 lawsuit brought by Tandy Corp, owners of the now-bankrupt RadioShack.

RadioShack later started selling power strips, extension cords and electrical power supplies in a section of their store called the PowerZone. AutoZone sued, but lost in 2004.

The company figures it will spend $6,000 to change everything from the name, letterhead, signage, etc… Bill Hamm did say that he will not just turn over the domain names for free. Good on your Bill. Lenna Hamm also said they are getting support from customers and people around the country who are starting to boycott Auto Zone.

Read the full article on

#BlackLivesMatter Launches JoinCampaignZero.Org: Is Hospital Asst Site

MONDAY,24 AUGUST 2015 The Domains
According to the news from on August 24th, is just one of the many media outlets that reported on a new online platform for the Black Lives Matter movement::

“The Black Lives Matter movement announced on Friday that it has an official platform for curbing police violence and reforming criminal justice in the U.S.

The social activism group released its most comprehensive policy outline to date on a website titled

Campaign Zero

“We can live in an America where the police do not kill people,” the group said on its new Internet portal.”

Mike Berkens actually pointed out to me that the article then goes on to refer to the movement as just “Campaign Zero” many times.

However there is a website is located at which is a non-profit corporation which empowers patents when getting medical care. This organization also refers to themselves on their site as just CampaignZero:

“”CampaignZERO offers simple checklists to patients and their family-member Care Partners to help them support safe and sound care during hospital stays.

CampaignZERO has three main goals:

Prevent harm and death caused by common and preventable hazards in hospital care.
Put patients, their families and all doctors and nurses “on the same page” with simple checklists
Promote candid conversations and productive partnerships for patients.

You’ll learn how to safeguard care for the people you love…

What to watch for
What to do
What to say
When to get help

Please share CampaignZERO with everyone you care about.”” is owned by PartnerHealth LLC of Illinois and was registered in 2010.

CampaignZero.Org also owns the domain name which was registered in 2009 and is being forward to the .Org site.

By using may people are going to be confused thinking there is some relation between the organization that registered its domain name just days ago and the established organization known using CampaignZero.Org.

The whole mess could have been avoided if the organizers of the #blacklivesmatter movement would have chosen to just register the domain name, which is sitting available as of publication which would have greatly reduced the chance to get confused or think that the two .org’s are related.

The call to action type of domain starting with “Join” is tricky when there is another Organization by the same name already in existence

Beyond that the may have legal rights to

The site is showing a trademark by the logo on its site and if the organization has been active since say 2000, they may well have common law trademark rights to the term. Seems To Have Sold To GifYT Startup

MONDAY,24 AUGUST 2015 The Domains
According to the news from on August 24th,the premium generic domain name has launched a new website based on this announcement on by Co-Founder of GifYT, Rory O’Reilly, and they have a new domain name that was not owned by the company until recently according to whois records.

Every day, GIFs are being created and used to deliver engaging content — from news, to sports, to art, to humor, gifs are used more and more. Gifs, long a mainstay of the web, have greater potential than ever before. That’s why today, we’re announcing the official launch of and the GIFs Player. With funding from Biz Stone, Binary, Foundation Capital, and 1517 we are bringing gifs into the 21st century.

The domain name was owned by Advertical Media LLC of Palm Coast Florida until the domain name recently changed to privacy protection at eNom on July 10, 2015. On August 4, 2015 name servers changed to what they are today. listed the company founded in 2013 with $75,000 seed funding and a valuation of $375K, under the name . A whois search for that domain name confirms it is currently owned by GifYT Co-Founder Rory O’Reilly.

To note, YouTube is a registered trademark of Google Inc.

It appears the company wisely did a name change to GifYT and also owns that matching domain name, which the company was using as its main domain for the services they offer. is still a live site and very similar to the recently launched

Getty Images owns the singular version of the term, and uses that domain name as a simple redirect to gives an appraisal of the domain name at $162,000 USD which does reflect the worldwide Alexa ranking of 101,000 and the 17,000 U.S. ranking which are traffic indicators for the site. Advertical Media, LLC. did have a website on the domain prior.


We did reach out to both parties for comment but have not heard back at time of publication.

Screen shot above, of on August 22, 2015 and Domain Name Sell! Is Under Armour The Buyer?

MONDAY,24 AUGUST 2015 The Domains
According to the news from on August 24th,
and domain names have been sold!

Both domain names were owned by Arms & Armor, Inc. of Minneapolis, MN and registered at Network Solutions for a very long time.

Both domain names have now transferred to NetNames Ltd.

The Arms & Armor website states that “Our new domain name is! Please update your bookmarks now.” confirming the change of ownership. There was also a mention in the news section of the website dated August 17, 2015 and an August 10, 2015 statement on the company’s Facebook page.

“Arms & Armor, Inc. has been producing world-renowned replicas of Medieval and Renaissance weapons and armor for more than twenty five years” according to its website.

They have owned both premium generic domain names and since at least 2001, which is the oldest historical whois history records provided on and potentially dating back to the current creation dates for both domain names:

  • has been registered since September 12, 1995
  • has been registered since September 12, 1995

Potential buyers?

There are plenty, but we have to look at some clues in place.

NetNames is a corporate brand protection domain service provider.

Under Armour has the vast majority of its domain names registered with CSC Corporate Domains.

Under Armour is a logical buyer though and owns about 859 domain names according to reverse whois.

Under Armour owns a fair amount of domain names containing both “Armour” (more) and “Armor” (less) terms.

In a story by the a few days ago  titled “Under Armour is suing pretty much every company using the name ‘Armor’” the company the story was talking about was Armor & Glory being sued.

“The trademark-infringement lawsuit filed this month in Maryland federal court has sparked a messy David-versus-Goliath battle in the fringes of American athletic wear and cast an unflattering spotlight on how fiercely the Baltimore-based giant intends to guard its brand and fight its way to the top.”

“Under Armour’s attorneys at the Washington-based Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, one of the world’s largest intellectual-property firms, wrote that Armor & Glory should have to destroy all products, hand over its domain name and any profits, and pay Under Armour’s attorney’s fees and damages of $100,000 or more.”

That domain name is,, registered January 28, 2013.

Under Armour, Inc. (UA)  has used the UDRP process, with 3 wins since October 2013 according to Two cases were filed in 2013 and one in 2015

My gut though is telling me that UA may NOT be the buyers of the and domains. I would feel more confident if the domains were under generic whois data at CSC and not at NetNames. I see more UK based companies using NetNames in general through my daily research. is even registered with CSC.

Since both domain names are so generic, we will have to “wait and see” until whois updates out of generic status or until the domain names are put into use, but Under Armour would be a potential buyer.

Both domain names and are redirecting to Arms & Armor Inc.’s new double hyphen domain, which just may be the worst domain name down grade ever after a big payday? It is not uncommon when a company’s “main domain name” is purchased, that the sellers request a specific amount of time to alert customers of the domain name change for a period of time to alert them. That is the likely reason the domain names are still redirecting to the past owners website currently.

If Under Armour were not the buyers of the domain names and, will UA try to obtain the domain names by legal means due to the recent change of ownership on them?

That will be something we keep an eye on.

Radix Does Record 532 Regs for EAP Day 5 in Just 45 minutes

MONDAY,24 AUGUST 2015 The Domains
According to the news from on August 24th,Radix announced that .Online, in just the first 45 minutes of Day 5 of its Early Access Program (EAP),  that allows people to register domain names for an extra fee ahead of General Availability (GA), they had 532 registrations.

We posted last week that .online is giving away a free .Online domain name to,  reader that comes closest to the number of total number domain names after GA has been live for 24 hours.

Radix did 120 registrations from Day 1 to Day 4 of EAP.

I had been monitoring a few names for day 5 which if there was no premium attached cost $175. I had noticed day 5 EAP was not available after day 1 and was curious if someone would pay $650 to take it on day 4 EAP.

Another name I was looking at with interest in GA was which was one of the 532 registered today, I was not willing to pay $175 but I would have taken it for a hand registration.


Breaking: Fully Developed Domain Name Sells to Puppet Labs?

FRIDAY,21 AUGUST 2015 The Domains
According to the news from Domain Forum of China on August 21th, has been acquired by a currently unknown company. This domain name very likely sold for A LOT of money and this is why I say that.

Beverly Hills Teddy Bear Company owned the domain name. Marksmen, a domain name buy service is who acquired the domain on behalf of a client. was a fully established website, selling Puppets! Indexed in Google with several hundred indexed pages.


BHTBC owns several great generic domain names like,,, and to mention a few. This proves that they understand value in domain names. It’s not likely they do not understand the value and were uneducated on them to sell cheap.

Selling a great generic domain name that had a fully developed website on it is going to take a large sum of money to convince the current owner to sell, no question in mind about that!

According to its website, Beverly Hills Teddy Bear Company:

The Beverly Hills Teddy Bear Company is a full spectrum manufacturer. For over two decades some of the best known companies in the world have chosen us to design, create and manufacture in-line or value added products. We develop safe, high-quality merchandise at price points designed to work across all channels of trade.

BHTB specializes in Custom, Private Label and Licensed toys, gifts, and plush for both in-line retail sales and strategic promotions.

So, this brings up the question of who are the potential buyers? Puppet Labs! They are heavily funded with $85.5 Million according to CrunchBase. They currently use and have the domain name under privacy protection using DYN Inc. and its registrar. has now transferred to DYN Inc. out of eNom and is under privacy protection using DYN Inc.

Those things lining up = the likely buyer!

Puppet labs according to CrunchBase:

“Puppet Labs develops IT automation software. The company’s flagship products, Puppet and Puppet Enterprise, are designed to allow companies to automate configuration management and infrastructure, cut costs and help organizations better handle infrastructure management at scale.”

Puppet also has PuppetConf, which is a conference. was also sold at Sedo fairly recently and Marksmen was also tied to that purchase. Puppet Labs Inc. is the owner of that domain name now according to whois records. is under privacy protection with DYN Inc. and has potential to be owned by Puppet Labs. is currently a parked domain name and owned by Vertical Axis.

I have reached out to CEO David Socha of Beverly Hills Teddy Bear Company for comment and hope to hear back from him shortly and will update when I do.

“Straight Outta” Viral Meme Launched On Days Old Domain By Apple / Beats By Dre

FRIDAY,21 AUGUST 2015 The Domains
According to the news from Domain Forum of China on August 21th,maybe you have seen those images flying around the web recently on Facebook and Twitter etc with the block term “Straight Outta” and then you can type in the term you wish…


Well, that viral meme is the works of Apple Inc. / Beats By Dre / Universal Pictures and was launched on the domain name that was registered only 28 days ago on July 23, 2015 at corporate domain name registrar CSC Corporate Domains. At the time and until yesterday, it wasn’t fully clear who owned the domain name, even though the website was Beats By Dre branded.

Whois information for the domain name was created using generic whois data, only showing CSC Corporate Domains and even name servers were using CSC.

As of August 18, 2015, name servers have switched to

The website is also featuring the first album in 16 years by Dr. Dre and many other musical artists are features with Straight Outta images by each. The site features limited edition Straight Outta Compton wireless headphones linking to site, a link to iTunes for the new album for Dr. Dre and a few other things. The website in general is Beats themed and provides a link to the movie site directly on the top of the site, right by the meme generator.

“Straight Outta Somewhere” meme was the brainchild of Beats By Dre, in partnership with Universal Pictures” according to Beats By Dre is owned by Apple Inc.

The Straight Outta Compton movie has been a big hit, which is produced by Dr. Dre himself, Ice Cube and others, which is leading the box office currently. The movie launched August 14, 2015.

The movie is using the EMD, which is owned by Universal Studios but they haven’t always owned it. Frank Schilling’s Name Administration Inc. was the owner of the domain name up to about July 11, 2014 when it sold for $5,500 to Universal. The domain has been registered since 2007. Sold For Up To $38 Million With $15.5 Million In Cash, But…..

FRIDAY,21 AUGUST 2015 The Domains
According to the news from Domain Forum of China on August 21th,Publicly traded Remark Media, Inc. (NASDAQ: MARK) announced today they entered into an agreement to buy in a deal that could be valued up to $38 Million dollars. which is privately owned is a online booking company for all things Vegas.

Under The terms of the proposed deal, which is subject to approval by shareholders of Remark Media (Remark),The Greenspun Corporation, the owners of would get:

$15.5 million in cash

$9.5 million in shares of stock in Remark.

$10 million in five-year warrants to purchase shares of common stock in Remark at an exercise price of $9.00 per share and

Up to a total of $3 million in Earn out payments based on the performance of in the years ending December 31, 2016, 2017 and 2018

According to the AP story gets 3.4 million visitors a month and Remark Media based out of Las Vegas board includes “Las Vegas Strip executives connected to the Venetian and Palazzo hotel-casinos, CityCenter resorts and the Tao group of nightclubs”.

Remark Media owns, and among other web properties and that is where the story gets even more interestign

You might recall that another public comapny, InterSearch Group, Inc. (OTCBB:IGPN) acquired in 2006, after reportedly paying somewhere around $12.5 Million for in 2005

In 2007, InterSearch Group, Inc. changed it’s name and wound up trading as, on the AMEX in 2007: under the stock symbol BNX.

In 2011, which at the time still owned, got delisted from the American Stock Exchange. then started trading as, Inc. on the OTCQB: under the stock symbol BNNX.

In June 2012, Remark Media, Inc. announced it had acquired (the company) which included the domain names and, in a deal where the shareholders of the company,, became shareholders of Remark Media, Inc.

So A few thoughts.

Remark Media is trading at $4.10 a share and only has a market cap of $59 Million.

Remark Media has a 52 week high of $7.60 and the $10 million in Warrants carry an exercise price of $9 a share, more than double the price of what Remark shares closed at yesterday and 20% more than its 52 week high.

$9.5 million dollars in shares of Remark based on yesterday’s close of $4.10 would be around 2.4 million shares.

Shares of Remark have a 3 month moving average, trading around 31K shares a day with just 11K shares traded yesterday.

According to its latest financial statement filed on August 15th, Remark only had 821,000 in revenue for the quarter ending June 30, 2015 and $1.6 Million for the six months ending June 30, 2015 and has “in each fiscal year since our inception, incurred net losses and generated negative cash flow from operations, resulting in an accumulated deficit of $136.2 million”

So since Remark has been operating they says the have lost a total of $136.2 Million dollars.

According to that same filing Remark, as of June 30, 2015, “”owed $9.8 million of aggregate principal remained outstanding under debt agreements, $6.0 million of which we owe to a related party under senior secured convertible promissory notes. Of the amount owed to the related party, $2.5 million of principal plus any accrued but unpaid interest is due and payable in November 2015, and $3.5 million of principal plus any accrued but unpaid interest is due and payable in January 2016.”

“Remark during the six months ended June 30, 2015, issued a total of 1,100,000 shares of our common stock to investors in certain private placements and registered direct offerings in exchange for approximately $4.1 million in cash.”

On its face in my opinion, Its a very strange deal.

According to Remark Media they are a “global digital media company focusing on the 18-year-old to 34-year-old mark”

“The company’s primary operations consist of owning and operating digital media properties, such as websites and applications for mobile devices, that provide unique, dynamic digital media experiences in multiple content verticals, including personal finance, young adult lifestyle, travel, education and entertainment. The company is headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada, with additional operations in Beijing, China and Sao Paolo, Brazil.”