They took my realsestate.com.au

[MrMatrix]

Thats illegal nobody owns the word Realestate this is a joke.
nobody can register a business called Realestate its a primary word.

anybody should be able to register misspled words of any primary word its called slang.

just because its a popular website realestate.com.au dosent mean they own the word.

microsoft dosent own the software
intel dosent own the word computer

we can have softwareee or komputers

im taking them to court can someone help me

 

[Nova]

Good luck is all I can say

 

[DomainNames]

I wouldnt be bothered fighting for that name. I cant see any value in that name at all.

my advice is stay away from obvious typo's .....what does realsestate mean anyway?? Its an obvious typo registration isnt it?

learn from it and invest more into better generic names that mean something and are of value

I would not have spent the registration fee on that name or renewal costs.. it's simply of no value.. maybe auda did you a favour by saving you development time and money and cancelling it? !

 

[Chris.C]

I don't understand why you would want it anyway?

 

[MrMatrix]

it dosent matter why i want it, the point is they wont let me have it.
its not a business name its a generic word. just because realestate.com.au have millions they act like they own realestate.

what a commo country we live in

 

[WG2010]

Are you for reals?

 

[MrMatrix]

I sure am and im taking them to court

 

[soj]

I wish I could short sell on your finances MrMatrix, I would make an absolute killing haha

 

[MrMatrix]

my case is clear if the court rules that misspelling generic words is illegal. i want that to be a law not just a flimsy policy.

and i want the law defined clearly not just the decision of auDA. and if so i want it a law for auDA to reserve all them names and not allow them to be registered to start with.

I guess either way im going to win something at the hearing

 

[Data Glasses]

Are you for reals?

ha ha


isn't there a banned typo list out there somewhere, maybe someone can supply it for all

 

[DomainNames]

save your money. forget the name and move on. dont make the same mistake and waste money and time on it.

They do have policies on misspellings. read all the policy docs. If you go to court and lose you will also pay their costs.

You have no chance on this one. Forget it

realsestate.com.au is on 1276 line of the banned misspellings list


http://www.auda.org.au/document.php?documentid=1022 auda-misspellings-list. A. 1, Current at 05 October 2010

http://www.auda.org.au/policies/auda-2008-09/ Prohibition on Misspellings Policy (2008-09)

List of Prohibited Misspellings

Policy No: 2008-09
Publication Date: 30/06/2008
Status: Current

1. BACKGROUND

1.1 This document sets out auDA’s policy on the registration of misspellings. It clarifies the type of domain name that auDA may regard as a prohibited misspelling, and the process that auDA will follow in dealing with prohibited misspellings.

2. TERMINOLOGY

2.1 This policy uses the following terms:

a) “entity name” means the name of an Australian registered company or incorporated association as listed with the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC), or the name of an Australian government body. It does not include a registered business name;

b) “personal name” means the given name(s) and/or last name of a person; and

c) “brand name” means the name of an identifiable and distinctive product or service, whether commercial or non-commercial.

3. POLICY PRINCIPLES

3.1 auDA’s objective in enforcing a prohibition on misspellings is to preserve the integrity of the .au domain space by discouraging “typosquatting”, whereby a person deliberately registers a misspelling of a popular domain name in order to divert trade or traffic.

3.2 auDA recognises that a domain name that appears to be a prohibited misspelling may not in fact be a prohibited misspelling given the particular circumstances of the case (eg. where two registrants have very similar entity, personal or brand names). The complaints-handling process set out in section 4 of this policy gives the registrant an opportunity to respond to the complaint and provide reasons why the domain name is not a prohibited misspelling. auDA will consider each case on its own merits.

3.3 auDA is also aware that some prohibited misspellings are repeatedly re-registered for the purpose of domain monetisation. In order to deal effectively with this category of prohibited misspellings, auDA will use the audit process set out in section 6 of this policy.

3.4 This policy may not be used to settle disputes between a registrant and a third party about competing rights to a domain name. Such disputes should be handled under the .au Dispute Resolution Policy (auDRP) or under Australian law.

4. SCOPE OF PROHIBITION

4.1 The prohibition on misspellings applies where:

a) the domain name is a misspelling of an entity, personal or brand name that does not belong to the registrant; and

b) the registrant has deliberately registered the misspelling in order to trade on the reputation of the other entity, person or brand.

4.2 For the purposes of the prohibition, a domain name will be regarded as a misspelling if it falls into one of the following categories:

a) the singular version of a plural name, or the plural version of a singular name (eg. woolworth.com.au, safeways.com.au);

b) a name with missing letters (eg. yhoo.com.au);

c) a name with additional letters (eg. quantas.com.au);

d) a name with transposed letters (eg. goolge.com.au, wetspac.com.au);

e) a name with letters replaced by numbers, or numbers replaced by letters (eg. 9msn.com.au);

f) a hyphenated version of a name (eg. e-bay.com.au, micro-soft.com.au);

g) a name prefixed by “www” (eg. wwwseek.com.au); or

h) any other name that auDA determines is a deliberate misspelling, having regard to the surrounding circumstances.

5. COMPLAINTS-HANDLING PROCESS

5.1 Where a person believes that a domain name is a prohibited misspelling as defined in section 4 of this policy, that person should lodge a complaint with auDA using the contact details on the auDA website at http://www.auda.org.au.

5.2 If auDA determines that the domain name may be a prohibited misspelling, auDA will contact the registrant and ask them to provide evidence to show that the domain name is not a prohibited misspelling. The registrant will be required to respond within 7 calendar days of auDA’s request. The registrar of record for the domain name will also be notified of the complaint.

5.3 If the registrant is able to show that the domain name is not a prohibited misspelling, auDA will take no further action on the complaint. The complainant may have further recourse against the registrant under the .au Dispute Resolution Policy (auDRP) or under Australian law (eg. trade mark infringement).

5.4 If the registrant is unable to show that the domain name is not a prohibited misspelling, or does not respond to auDA’s request for information, auDA will instruct the registrar to delete the domain name. The domain name will enter “serverUpdateProhibited” and “serverHold” status for 14 calendar days, then it will be dropped from the registry database at a random time between 10.30am and 5.00pm AEST (or 11.30am and 6.00pm AEDT) on the next business day.

5.5 The domain name will not be transferred to the complainant, or reserved for the complainant. If the complainant wants to license the domain name, they must apply for it using the normal application process.

6. AUDIT PROCESS

6.1 auDA will publish a list of prohibited misspellings that have been deleted under section 5 of this policy. auDA will conduct regular audits of the registry database to check whether domain names on the list have been registered again (by the same registrant, or another registrant).

6.2 Where a domain name on the list is found to have been registered by a person who does not appear to be associated with the relevant entity, personal or brand name, auDA will instruct the registrar of record to delete the domain name. The domain name will enter “serverUpdateProhibited” and “serverHold” status for 14 calendar days, then it will be dropped from the registry database at a random time between 10.30am and 5.00pm AEST (or 11.30am and 6.00pm AEDT) on the next business day.

6.3 auDA will notify the registrant that the domain name has been deleted as a prohibited misspelling. Whilst the domain name is in “serverUpdateProhibited” and “serverHold” status, if the registrant is able to show that the domain name is not a prohibited misspelling, auDA will instruct the registrar to reinstate the domain name.


Last Updated: 08/01/2009 09:08

 

[snoopy]

my case is clear if the court rules that misspelling generic words is illegal. i want that to be a law not just a flimsy policy.

and i want the law defined clearly not just the decision of auDA. and if so i want it a law for auDA to reserve all them names and not allow them to be registered to start with.

I guess either way im going to win something at the hearing

Who are you planning to take to court AUDA or Realestate.com.au? If its realestate.com.au what are you taking them to court for? If it is AUDA again what are you taking them to court for?

Realestate.com.au have a couple of trademarks over the domain (read that again, the domain, not the term) one registered in 1999 and the other 2002 and as some else stated AUDA has it in their misspelling lists so it is probably assumed that it should be checked before registering. Given all that I have no idea what you'd sue for. The reality of the situation is likely that realestate.com.au has a good case against you so I wouldn't be making waves.

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

I agree with Snoopy and Domain Names on this one, not worth the fight, and on the face of it, there wouldn't even be any grounds for a fight. It is also important to note that Trademark law protects owners against terms which may be 'deceptively similar'.

 

[James]

I think that it is a little unfair that you can not register a miss spelling of a "generic" keyword.

I can understand registering a miss spelling of a trademark as this is a render to a trademark.

But to be honest I don't think it is worth the time and hassle taking it to court, does this domain even make money or does it even get much traffic.

 

[DavidL]

MrMatrix - I had the exact same argument years ago with another misspelling of realestate.com.au

I argued hard on the principle and even went to the extent of creating a site with disclaimers stating it had nothing to do with the well known website Realestate.com.au. Instead of ads, I put up links to charities so that perhaps some good could come of the traffic - it also meant that I was clearly not profiting from the site.

I lost.

Fact is the others are right - it's not worth the hassle but you do raise a very good point and as a matter of principle I can see where you are coming from.

There's no question that some of the traffic your domain is receiving is from people looking for the well known property website. This is what auDA are trying to address - stop people from profiting from others brands.

However it is also just as true that some of the traffic is people using the 'direct navigation' method and mis-typing a generic dictionary word. Why should auDA dictate that you shouldn't receive some of that traffic?

auDA would probably argue that because Realestate.com.au is such a popular website it's a very well known brand so the amount of traffic aiming for that website would be significant. But that of course leads to the question of how big does a website's brand have to be to come into this category.

Could the owner of the website pets.com.au demand that pts.com.au is put on the list? Could I suggest that all our 2,000 odd domains are brand names in their own rights and therefore every reasonable misspelling be put on the list too (all 50,000 of them?)

It's impossible to draw the line.

That's why I firmly believe auDA should stay out of defining and enforcing brand names in the .au space. They are just asking for trouble I reckon. Leave it to the TM lawyers and the auDRP. The brand name related policies:

1) Monetisation
2) Misspelllings (inc the list)

are put in place in good faith and for a honourable intent but they are always going to be subjective as it comes down the auDA deciding what is or isn't a brand name.

Anyway that's a big part of the discussion on the names panel so hopefully there will be some clarity coming out of that.

 

[DomainNames]

To get any action join as AUDA members and vote for the candidates from this forum.

Dont expect anything to change at AUDA or in Auda Policy unless you get active and follow through with changes you want considered and voted on.

Joining AUDA as a member is only $22.

 

[Chris.C]

More importantly then whether it is legal, people should also be discussing whether it offers any value to end users. Buying domains like this is what gives domains a bad reputation.

I mean seriously, there is nothing you can do with this domain other than redirect it to realestate.com.au to help users that land on your page, because ultimately all these visitors wanted to do was get to that domain.

You would be far better off creating a website that provides genuine value to end users. These sites have much greater ability to be monetised and you don't have the legal headaches to go with it. Plus society is better off as a whole.

 

[DavidL]

More importantly then whether it is legal, people should also be discussing whether it offers any value to end users. Buying domains like this is what gives domains a bad reputation.

I mean seriously, there is nothing you can do with this domain other than redirect it to realestate.com.au to help users that land on your page, because ultimately all these visitors wanted to do was get to that domain.

You would be far better off creating a website that provides genuine value to end users. These sites have much greater ability to be monetised and you don't have the legal headaches to go with it. Plus society is better off as a whole.

You're right - all the user wanted to do was to get to that domain but did he want to get to the famous website we are discussing? Or was he just typing the generic word assuming that there would be some sort of real estate information on the site.

In terms of user value, I would argue though that in this case, a page full of property related ads would actually deliver more value to a user than a 'This page can not be displayed' error message.

I guess we'll never know but I do wonder how much type-in a name like that would get if the Realestate.com.au brand didn't exist?

 

[Chris.C]

You're right - all the user wanted to do was to get to that domain but did he want to get to the famous website we are discussing? Or was he just typing the generic word assuming that there would be some sort of real estate information on the site.

I'd assume the vast majority of individuals typing in that URL are actually looking for the branded website.

In terms of user value, I would argue though that in this case, a page full of property related ads would actually deliver more value to a user than a 'This page can not be displayed' error message.

But less value than just being redirected to the branded site.

I guess we'll never know but I do wonder how much type-in a name like that would get if the Realestate.com.au brand didn't exist?

If I had to put a number on it I would bet it would be less than 10% of what it gets with the branded site already been developed.

 

[DavidL]

Agree x 3