Toth v Emirates

[khalid]

I'm not replying to anyone, I'm just giving my two cents.

And regarding the TM; it's my opinion again. "Emirates" is a noun, a place and also the name of an airline. It's not just one of those, it's all of them, and would have been cheaper for the airline to buy the name than go down the legal route.

 

[khalid]

When someone says "Emirates" you think of an airline just like I someone says "amazon" you think of the retailer.

But, that doesn't mean that's what was meant and it's down to the context and interpretation.

 

[khalid]

and btw, £15,000 in legal fees I doubt, try 5 times that at least.

I doubt you'll find Emirates using "lawyers4u"

 

[khalid]

You're forgetting the time factor involved any an fees for consults etc that wasn't in the decision.

Every man has a price, I don't know Michael that well but I'd hedge my bets at under £100k

 

[khalid]

They've both made their decisions and I guess it's one the courts will decide on.

I'm on the fence really, I can see merit in both cases, I just think it would have been easier and probably cheaper for the airline to discuss purchasing the name with Michael.

Mind you, if they've got money to burn and principles to stand by then the court is there only other option.

 

[domainking]

emirates.eu arbitration decision published - 2009-08-22
emirates.co.uk DRS decision published - 24/09/2010
emirates.co.uk DRS appeal decision published - 07/01/2011

Whilst some here know Michael as an individual it is important to remember that he is conducting his registrations on behalf of a business
/QUOTE]

The domain is registered to Michael and not the business, if you look at the court papers its Toth V Emirates. this makes the case personal not business ie not a Ltd company, Michael is personally responsable if he looses this case. for that reason I really hope he wins.

 

[domainking]

Hang on. The £15,000 I cited was for the cost of the DRS decision, the DRS appeal and the associated legal costs of both. Not for anything subsequent. That is why I then stated:

...Had they any reason to believe Michael might decide to go to court until he decided to, following the appeal decision? If they'd known he would then maybe they'd have saved time and the £15,000 and gone directly to court in the first place. How much do you actually think Michael would have wanted for the domain name, prior to any action they took? Probably "Plenty"!

So how much do you think Michael would have wanted for the domain name, prior to any action they took (assuming he might have upped the price once they commenced arbitration/DRS processes)?

To fight a Domain battle in the UK courts the cost is about £350,000 when you take lawyers, QC, High court costs, ect.

 

[bensd]

To fight a Domain battle in the UK courts the cost is about £350,000 when you take lawyers, QC, High court costs, ect.

Have you had to do it before Tommy?

 

[domainking]

There's a difference between registering a domain name to oneself (i.e. an IND registration) and using it in a personal capacity, and registering a domain name to oneself and using it in a commercial capacity. Michael doesn't appear to be providing a not for profit information site about, for example, the UAE; there are advertising links throughout the existing site. In my opinion those advertising links constitute commercial use of the domain name. Business doesn't require a limited company. I realise this makes him personally responsible which seems deeply unfortunate.

Addition: I assume you are aware of how Michael allegedly managed to acquire emirates.eu during the sunrise period. According to the arbitration decision it was through the use of an intermediary and a Maltese trade mark "E&M&I&R&A&T&E&S". Why would anyone go to that length on a non commercial basis?

The law is the Law. if the name is registered to the person and not the business then the person is responsable thats the end of the story. it has nothing to do with the TM or anything else.

 

[domainking]

Have you had to do it before Tommy?

Just dont want to go there lol,

 

[domainking]

domains

I would also agree with Barry on this I will fight tooth and nail, for anyone coming after any of the domains that paid for.

I would demand not request a signed statement from any experts who give drs that they will be sued later if found out that there business has had any dealing with the other party.

 

[domainking]

Would you do that even if it didn't make commercial sense for you to do so? The art of being a winner is sometimes knowing when to walk away.

Been there and got the T shirt, The art is take no prisoners, if you let one get you then rest will follow, The art is being a winner if you walk away you loose. better to fight take them on. that stops others in future.

 

[dashu1]

The art is being a winner if you walk away you loose. better to fight take them on. that stops others in future.

Not if you lose it doesn't.

 

[mojoco]

Choose your fights wisely.

 

[rob]

tomorrow ought to shed more light on all this.

Incidentally I dont believe its a court case/hearing to decide on the domain and infringement, but more a technical one that will have possible major implications on all registrants.

ie. can you go to court after a DRS and the like.

I am sure there will be greater clarity tomorrow.

 

[rob]

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2012/517.html

Toth lost.

As thought, not a case about infringement or the like but todo with if the courts can re-hear a DRS. 'de novo' is the key phrase.

Nominet were an 'intervener' so it was Toth & Emirates & Nominet.

 

[khalid]

Can this decision be appealed?

 

[anthony]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/0...ns_finding_cannot_be_reheard_says_high_court/

So once the DRS process has been completed, don't bother going to Court.

 

[JMOT]

So nominet is the judge, jury and ultimate god in all things .uk not the british courts....Hmmm

Toth should sue Nominet now to force them to change their rules.

Seems grossly unfair that in now if you wanted to challenge a ruling you have no recourse.

Its a fucking outrage. If you suffer an injustice you must be able to appeal to the highest court in the land for justice to be served.

 

[Rob_F]

Cuts both ways I guess. If nom experts rule that the registration was non-abusive, game over for the complainant.

On balance, probably a good thing. Defending a domain in court post drs wouldn't be an option for many registrants due the costs involved, therefore favours big companies and those with deep pockets. This ruling takes the "If we lose, we'll drag you through the courts" threat that some big companies use against registrants to try and bully them, out of the picture.

If the drs was a mess, I'd be worried, but it isn't. They don't always get it right, imo, but then neither do the courts.

- Rob