dont give it up. you cant get intimidated by all the legal bs at the bottom of the letter. If they could have grabbed it legally, they would have already instead of bartering with you. dont put it past a corporations lawyers to bs you
I actually have a similar issue and I asked them to provide me with proof of their copyright/trade mark.. they sent some info which i didn't really look over. I'm stuck in the same scenario as well.
I am not a lawyer but if the domain name is their name then I don't think the company can have a claim to it. Sounds like the nissan case. http://www.nissan.com/Digest/The_Story.php
If you want to keep the name, I would not even reply. If you have any interest in selling I would simply reply as follows: "Thank you for your email. If you are interested in purchasing the domain name MaryandPaul.com from me, please make a written offer. I will then consider your offer and respond accordingly." That is all I would do. Hope that helps you some.
I say ignore them. Unless your website copies their logos and trademarks there is no way they can lay claim to two personal names!
dont give it up for less than the right price, its yours. like thats like me going and copyrighting the brand name digitalpoint and then saying to mr hogan i want his domain.
Things that will be looked at in either litigation or UDRP procedures will be: Does the domain contain the trademark of the other company? (yes = bad) Does it contain the complete trademark? (yes = bad) Does the company with the site have the same/similar trademark as well? (yes = good) Did your client actually use the domain for actual content (meaning there is content and that it is not just filler content)? (yes = good) Is the site non-commercial? (yes = good) If it is commercial, are the products/services similar or competing? (yes = bad) Did the domain owner try to sell the domain to the holder of the trademark? (yes = bad) Is the intent of the site to 'steal' traffic from the trademark holder? (yes = bad) Does the site imply a relationship with the trademark holder? (yes = bad) Was the domain registered with false/incorrect info? (yes = bad) Has the owner of the domain registered several domains that are also questionable in this sense? (yes = bad) How distinct is the trademark, does it (by itself) equate to a product line in people's heads? (yes = bad) This is not an exhaustive list. Some things may be considered that are not on any list. Some can be thought of with some common sense (such as are the site owners named Mary and Paul). When these types of disputes go before the court they are as subjective as they are objective. Some things carry more weight. An attempt to sell the domain to the trademark holder for more than the expenses (registration, some advertising, but not development) will almost always go in the trademark holder's advantage. Having the complete trademark in the name does not. These are the things that would be looked at by either ICANN or US courts. I'm not sure how the UK courts handle these things. If it were to go to court, it could go to either place. Without researching the complainant's trademark, I would say that the site in question is not likely to be lost in a legal dispute. That being said, one wouldn't know unless it actually escalated that far.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't find the letter intimidating at all. It stated their rights, but offered a way to settle the matter that's mutually beneficial. My hats off to the one who composed that. Some parties who are in the midst of sending C&Ds can take a hint from it.
My thoughts are international eminent domains and is the trademark worldwide. My reasoning is all the recent lawsuits that Google had with people in other countries outside of the US who had the domain Gmail. Many times they lost and or won. Do some research and or ask around. I do know at certain forums where there is a little bit more expertise in such matters is DNjournal and Namepros. I know they have like 2 or 3 eminent domain lawyers floating around. So check there you may get a reply on internation eminent domain laws and tradmarking.
I had a similar issue with a domain I owned (own) with the MTV brand in the domain name; I wnet and back for so long that I just got fed up and signed it over..... six months on and it still belongs to me, it's like I agreed to give it them and then they just left me alone.. I still control it. In this case, with it being people's names and not a unique company name infringement, they might have a slight case but they'd have to fight hard for it.. which they wont want to do. One point I should make is; if you ask for a lot of moneyt then they use that against you by accusing you of cyber squatting and waiting for a payoff.. careful how you tread! In these early stages, I would not respond and wait and see where they take it. You can also say that you've seeked advice and been told that the use of generic names in URL's is allowed in all cases except where cyber squatting on an established brand can be proven - like BenandJerrys for example... good luck!
I don't know if not replying to the letter would be a wise idea or not. Either way, if you really care about your domain you should speak to an attorney who handles domain and Internet law. From a legal standpoint, you need to be clear that you dispute their right to the name to hold up in court. Did you register your domain before the company was founded? If so, this will help you immensely. The company needs to prove that they came up with the name and officially used it in commerce before you registered the domain in order for their trademark claim to have any merit, in the United States at least. Now would be the time for you to start printing out WHOIS records showing you registered the name and any domain order receipts you may have. They will come in handy if you choose to go to court. May I ask what country you live in? Best of luck!
if you want to sell it, then ask for a good price.If you don;t just ignore them. Although i reccommend you to sell for a good prices, as they may have copyright rights and may get the domain.
Here is some good info for you if you wish to use it: Dear Michael A. Berghofer, I am replying to your email dated 01/01/01 In regard to the domain name www.maryandpaul.com this domain was actually regiestered after a couple of my friends, Mary and Paul. Now you can not say the Luxury's Ltd own my friends Mary and Paul, if they do actually own them, this must be the first case in the world where a company actually claims to own people. In the interests of mankind, I suggest that you do not try to chase a domain that contains my friends names. If your client would like to purchase my friends off me, that is asking a bit much, I have never heard of a UK company going to such levels to gain friends. However in saying that, I am sure we could negotiate a suitable price for this domain, that I would be happy to accept. May I suggest $250,000 to start with. Awaiting your reply.
Mocking them will only make them angry. Asking for an outrageous will get the domain lost quickly, and could cause substantial fines. At least in the US.
Some good information available in this case http://www.wipo.int/cgi-bin/domains/search/CaseCatReport?case_id=1656
I am not a lawyer but I think you shouldn't worry untill you get a snail mail. it could be some1 just who likes your domain and wants with no rights to it. if you get a snail mail or you want to reply you can use the template bellow
IANAL... but don't offer to sell to them. That puts you in a bad spot if it goes to UDRP (ie: you violate # iii below by offering to sell). In order to win at UDRP the complainant most win on all 3 points below: (i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; (ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and (iii) the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2005/d2005-1185.html You can review past cases here and get a sense of who wins & loses & why. http://www.icann.org/cgi-bin/udrp/udrp.cgi I see no US trademark for "Mary and Paul" http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=if8q45.1.1