Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gail, not Gmail

gail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 166 posts

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#41

Post by burntsushi »

The FAQ links to an account of an attempted takeover of the domain that I found fascinating to read: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/d2006...

Some interesting excerpts:

> vii) it is unlikely that the Respondent was unaware of the Complainant’s trademark considering the fame and tradition of the trademark GAIL

I have personally never heard of GAIL and found it funny that this was part of the complaint. They even move on from "unlikely" to "fact" when accusing the owners of gail.com that they were acting in bad faith:

> Furthermore, because the Respondent registered the domain name exactly when the Complainant increased its sales of GAIL products to the United States, this should be identified as an abusive practice. Lastly, the Respondent knew about the existence of the Complainant and of its GAIL trademark and nevertheless proceeded with the registration of the domain name.

The owners of gail made a counter-claim:

> (d) Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

> The Respondent alleges that the Complainant is using the Policy in bad faith for reverse domain name hijacking.

The arbiters ended up deciding that the owners of gail.com had a "legitimate interest" in operating the domain name, so they didn't comment on GAIL's accusation of bad faith.

(As someone who really detests IP law in its various forms, I've always found it unnerving that domain names can be seized simply based on whether a third party thinks your use is "legitimate" or not.)

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#42

Post by Aissen »

> Q: I think you're infringing on my trademark...

> A: If you consult with someone well versed in trademark law, they will tell you that you can't have an exclusive trademark on a common word or name. My husband and I successfully defended ourselves against an attempted domain takeover in 2006; see WIPO Case D2006-0655 for more information.

Well, it depends on the jurisdiction. In France, in the infamous "Milka" case, the opposite happened: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milka_contre_Kraft_Foods (french)

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#44

Post by Exuma »

I never understand people that wouldn't sell something like this. So if Google offered you $500,000 you're not going to take it, just to make this stupid statement that you're against ads? Get real.

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#45

Post by alekratz »

Exuma wrote: post #44

I never understand people that wouldn't sell something like this. So if Google offered you $500,000 you're not going to take it, just to make this stupid statement that you're against ads? Get real.

It's her personal site, and it looks like she just wants to be left alone. You get real, not everything is about money.

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#46

Post by Exuma »

alekratz wrote: post #45
Exuma wrote: post #44

I never understand people that wouldn't sell something like this. So if Google offered you $500,000 you're not going to take it, just to make this stupid statement that you're against ads? Get real.

It's her personal site, and it looks like she just wants to be left alone. You get real, not everything is about money.

Sorry, but at some point logic and reason take over. No one's mentioning money grubbing capitalism here at the expense of someone else...

What we have here is literally a blank page, that offers no value to the reader. Perhaps if they showed something worthwhile I could understand.

Yet, It's only a pat-myself-on-the-back message how they defend their name.

So they USE the name to talk about how they're protecting the name. That's like people that make money teaching people how to make money.

Just take the damn money and use it for something good.

Edit: this is reminiscent of nissan.com ... he's selling computer repair for $50/hr... yet could sell his domain for millions. The main purpose of his site to primarily advertise how he's standing up to lawsuits.

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#48

Post by alekratz »

Exuma wrote: post #46
alekratz wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's her personal site, and it looks like she just wants to be left alone. You get real, not everything is about money.

Sorry, but at some point logic and reason take over. No one's mentioning money grubbing capitalism here at the expense of someone else... What we have here is literally a blank page, that offers no value to the reader. Perhaps if they showed something worthwhile I could understand. Yet, It's only a pat-myself-on-the-back message how they defend their name. So they USE the name to talk about how they're protecting the…

It doesn't exist for you. It exists for Gail. Not every website on this internet exists to be a product or sell you something.

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#49

Post by mathgeek »

Exuma wrote: post #46
alekratz wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's her personal site, and it looks like she just wants to be left alone. You get real, not everything is about money.

Sorry, but at some point logic and reason take over. No one's mentioning money grubbing capitalism here at the expense of someone else... What we have here is literally a blank page, that offers no value to the reader. Perhaps if they showed something worthwhile I could understand. Yet, It's only a pat-myself-on-the-back message how they defend their name. So they USE the name to talk about how they're protecting the…

I got entertainment value from it.
Post reply on HN