There is no point going in to a long intro but rather I will get right to the point.

A member of a  forum raised a legitimate issue of why do drop catchers send out notices announcing upcoming drops and auctions that are a blatant TM issue. The matter was posted in the appropriate sub-forum but could have been asked of all drop catchers and auctions:

I receive —– daily “hotlist,” which shows about 20 of the most promising deleting domains.

Yesterday, I sent them this email:

I know you don’t check every domain for possible TM violations … but it still reflects badly on —- when your daily “hotlist” of deleting domains includes things like verizonaccountonline.com (on today’s list). I’d suggest that you at least check the lists before you email them to people, to ensure that you’re not advertising blatant TM-violating domains.

Today I received from them a reply, basically stating:

Thousands of domains are deleted every day and we do not have the resources to review each one [...]

And look what showed up on today’s “hotlist”: verizonbillpay.com

This is a very shallow argument. We do not have the resources to review each one. Okay, how about the list that is compiled and sent out to each subscriber? Computer generated list? If so, then why do I not see 820996arringtiinoons.com on the list.

Of course not – the list is not computer selected at random. It is a hand screened and hand compiled list.

If I thought for one minute that the list compiled and sent out to each subscriber was randomly selected by a computer then there would be no issue. Those names appearing on the list are hand selected and that listing is compiled by a human and send to subscribers. The argument of no resources available to check is shallow and full of holes as that resource you just assigned to the task of compiling a list could have easily selected a non-TM.

Lets face it. 820996arringtiinoons.com on the list is not going to garner the attention or the bids that the verizon names do.

So what do you say we just post the post and counter posts:

Filtering on TM names is not a bad idea but is difficult to implemetn oni a grand scale. You should all remember of course that the names in the hot list are just that “hot” which means thay have been ordered by customers. We don’t go after domains for ourselves we only go after domains that custoemrs place orders for and some customers may have valid rights tot he domains they are ordering.

The technology does exist to purge the lists of TM violations.

No one will start using it until a lawsuit is filed making these drop catchers culpable for facilitating the sale and transfer of Trade Marked property much like pirated DVD’s etc.

And, these drop cathers, auctions, and so on know it.

No point in taking these names down when business is good…or bad!

But, DocCom, you miss the most important point and that is what if the legitimate TM holder wants to order the domain? Shouldn’t they be allowed? And what if there is more than one person that owns the TM? Shouldn’t they all be allowed? And who is to decide which TM owner has more validity over another? This is not the job of the drop catcher.

To suggest that a TM holder wants to order or backorder something that is already theirs is absurd.

Simply WIPO/URDP and end of game.

One or more than one person/entities own the word or have rights to the domain? Again, if it is known TM irregardless of holder or rights then it should be pulled.

If one or more make a claim and that claim is backed by a simple TM database check then private auctions.

These systems and checks are already in place. Drop catchers act like it is too expensive or time consuming to implement. That is total bull.

Why dropcatchers/registrars/auctions do not want to clean up their own act or be subjected to ICANN oversight is beyond me.

It does not matter if the Snowe Bill is a bunch of crap. It does not matter that the Department of Commerce has issued a statement strongly urging ICANN to reconsider its position. It does not matter if there are Senate hearings and Congressional subcommittees ongoing as we type regarding these very issues.

It does not matter if there are now at least two systems in place to block all parked pages, typo and brand squatting and one of those systems has identified 42 million sites/pages that fit this description.

What matters is the industry has turned a blind eye to all of this while the money is good and flowing, even in a downturn economy.

What matters is due to poor over site and policing of self, now congressional members and internet commerce enforcement organizations feel compelled to make an issue out of it.

Call it grandstanding or a ploy for the headlines or campaign fodder.

The fact remains that it is an issue, a big issue, and these very commitees, organizations, and lawmakers represent the global consumer and not domainers interests.

The problem with domainers is they are domainers. They think the control the internet and every thing on it.

Domainers in fact make up a minute portion of the nearly 6.5 billion people on this planet.

Is a member running for congress going to appease the 47,000 members of this forum by voting down any attempt to regulate the industry? Or do you think that congressional member may want to represent the 30,000,000 voters in his home state?

All of this is a signal, a strong signal in my opinion, that it is past time to clean up your own act before your act is banned and shut down.

I am getting ready to have a TM finalized as we speak. All is a go and I should be hearing any day that the TM is registered.

You can damn well better believe that if a name is registered after the fact and it is sold, traded or auctioned off that it will be a clean sweep of the registrar who permitted the registration, the person who registered the name, and the auction company that facilitated the sale and trade of trademarked material. And I feel confident that I could find an attorney or even someone from the State Attorney General’s office to take the case on a pro bono basis. Controversy makes great publicity and it is free press coverage that most could not afford to pay.

A statement in the TOS does not release any one involved of any wrong doing. Some think it does, others don’t think so.

Am I guilty of violating these issues?

Yup.

Its a matter of time for me and all involved in the domaining business.

Time for domainers to quit thinking and speaking like a domainer and act more like a consumer and see things from that perspective.

The problem with UDRP and/or WIPO is expense. If a TM owner can reclaim their domain by simply placing a $60 bacorder, why shouldn’t they be allowed to do that? And it is simply not practical for a drop catcher to maintain a constant up-to-date TM database for all TM offices world wide. There are companies that provide that service at a fee of course. But with 50,000 domains dropping each day do you really think someone has the resources to idenitfy daily what domains pose a TM violation? As I said some companies do that but they charge a feeto make that determination.

Indepent of the issue of making dropping TM domains available to TM owners, DocCom you seem to think the problem of monitoring dropping domains against a TM database is an easy enough task to do, why don’t you do it? And offer the service for free to all potential purchasers so that they can assess the possible TM issues before placing an order.

It is not my job to do it.

It will be yours.

Expense?

A program.

Impossible to do?

I have already outlined how it is done.

You know this can be done and you know it can be done at a reasonable cost .

You act like you have to hire an entire staff to do it.

This is not the case and you know it. A name gets red flagged and it is checked.

How difficult can that be.

Some companies do that and charge a fee.

Like Pool catching domains and charging a fee to the buyer and winners?

Great concept of doing business.

Playing dumb is not going to make this issue go away. It is not just Pool and it is not going to go away.

Seriously, time to implement some measures to protect the consumer and protect these brands before it is written into law and ICANN is replaced by another body.

As for a TM holder just paying 60 bucks (if that ever happens) vs UDRP/WIPO, how about the TM holder just filing suit in district and federal court.

What, costly you say?

What kind of mileage and traffic and notice such a filing would bring to the general public?

Seems to me Microsoft could easily seized the 44 names from the three individuals typosquatting in the state of Indiana.

Why do that when every newspaper and internet media outlet picked up the story and ran with it.

Cost to microsoft? Court filing fees.

Free publicity? Priceless.

Even microsoft would have to had shelled out millions to sway every print and internet media outlet to make this story a feature.

Another member summed up this matter very nicely:

You are skirting the issue.
Nobody is saying you must monitor all names for possible TM violations, but when you dispatch a daily ‘selection’ of drops to your customers, it is your editorial responsibility not to appear to be endorsing the registration of blatant TM domains.
It’s no wonder domains have such a bad rep when the industry leaders set the standards. Seriously, it’s an invitation to another Snowe Bill.
Maybe one day Verizon et al will have had enough and they will sue you like they did to onlinenic. When they drive you out of business I will place a backorder on the pool.com domain

Personally, I do not want Olympia Snowe or Congress or the Department of Commerce to feel compelled to clean up the domain industry due to their own negligence.

It is time for the domain industry to clean up itself and to take out the trash.