:: domaining business blog // Domaining for Domainers

Archive for the ‘intellectual property’ Category

Adrian Peterson needs a new lawyer

September 10, 2012adrian peterson, Domaining, Domainnamewire, intellectual property, Policy & Law, udrpComments Off on Adrian Peterson needs a new lawyer

Mistake ridden domain name complaints cost the player his online identity.

Minnesota Vikings player Adrian Peterson needs to get a new lawyer — and not for his criminal issues.

He needs new intellectual property lawyers.

If your lawyers make a mistake once, perhaps you overlook it.

But twice?

Back in April Adrian Peterson won a UDRP for the domain name But his attorneys at Gant & Hicks asked for the domain name registration to be canceled rather than transferred.

So the domain name registrar dutifully deleted the domain name and it was picked up by someone in Japan.

The same law firm filed a case in August for the domain name It screwed up at least twice in this new complaint.

First, it again asked the panel to cancel the domain rather than transfer it. It realized its mistake later and asked the panel to change the request to a transfer. (I’m amazed it would make this same mistake again after what happened last time!)

Second, it turned in a weak case that didn’t even get past the first element; his lawyers failed to provide even the basic information required to show that Peterson had rights in the “Adrian Peterson” name.

The panelist on the case even wrote that the entire case was poorly formulated:

Although Complainant is professionally represented and the Complaint was prepared by those representatives, there is very little in the Complaint to link it to the requirements of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.

Peterson lost a case he should have won. It’s time for him to hire a new lawyer.

© 2012. This is copyrighted content. Do not republish.

Latest domain news at Domain Name Wire.

No related posts.

When a Business Relationship Goes Sour, Make Sure You Own the Domain Name

June 29, 2011Domaining, Domainnamewire, intellectual property, lawsuits, Policy & LawComments Off on When a Business Relationship Goes Sour, Make Sure You Own the Domain Name

Another lawsuit shows that domain names are important intellectual property.

I’ve written numerous times about web design companies holding a client’s domain name hostage. Here’s another cautionary tale about domain name ownership.

A Florida company called, Inc says that its former outsourced tech team has stolen its intellectual property and its domain name (pdf)., Inc. says it contracted with the (now) defendants to perform a number of technical tasks including registering its domain name. But the defendant in charge of registering the domain name registered it in his personal name.

After the business relationship went sour, the company claims the defendants stole the intellectual property including software code and domain name. To make matters worse, it alleges that one of the defendants sent an email to an important business partner from’s email account — using the email alias of the company founder and plaintiff.

Remember, if you control the domain name you control the email.

I think many people overlook how your domain name is an important piece of intellectual property. Make sure you own it.

© 2011.

Get Certified Parking Stats at DNW Certified Stats.

Related posts:

  1. Woman Says She Threw Away Business Over $483 Domain Name

Cost-Per-Action Search Engine Patent Headed to Auction Block

September 1, 2010Domaining, Domainnamewire, intellectual property, patent, Policy & LawComments Off on Cost-Per-Action Search Engine Patent Headed to Auction Block

Patent could potentially target Google and Microsoft.

A U.S. patent directed at cost-per-action advertising on search engines as well as cash-back search is headed to the auction block.

Sunnyvale, California based AnchorFree Inc. has enlisted ICAP Ocean Tomo to auction off U.S. patent number 7,647,305 (pdf) at its November 11 intellectual property auction in Napa, California.

The patent covers two main things. First, it covers charging search ad customers based on a CPA model rather than cost-per-click. Google has already toyed around with this sort of idea, charging customers based on an action (such as a sale or lead) rather than per click.

Second, the patent covers giving a portion of advertising fees back to the searcher. This is similar to Microsoft’s CashBack search, which rewarded searchers with a percentage of Microsoft’s affiliate fees when customers made a purchase. Microsoft has shut down the service, but many similar services exist.

Can’t wait for the auction? The patent has a buy-it-now price of $2 million.

© 2010.

Get Certified Parking Stats at DNW Certified Stats.

Related posts:

  1. Will Cost Per Action Replace Cost Per Click?
  2. Yahoo Awarded Patent for Human-Enhanced Search Engine
  3. Google Awarded Patent for Local Search Integrated with Whois