General Discussions

**awt22** · 03-16-2007, 06:42 PM

There a problem thats just arose.

I have been given a notice that icann procedding are being taken against me for the use of this domain <potterybarn.org>, which it is claimed by a third party to be breaking icann rules against such matters. I have read the rules about trademarks and other issuess and i can not understand what i have done wrong.

Once i became aware of the EU and USA trademark owened by the company, i clearly stated on my website that i have nothing to do with them

There are three rules they must meet in order to have this domain taken (i myself look on it as stealing away from me). all three of these rules clearly do not match my site, apart from my domain being the same as this big company POTTERY BARN, but i have place trademark compliance notice clearly on my site, this should cover me from this shouldn't it

Basicly its a big company from the USA, williams-somona inc, i'm a small little guy and they have twisted various information i have given them and tried to make me look like some sort of scammer or shady character

Infact information they had submited is incorrect, they have made up false information in order to paint me as some shading character lurcking on the interent trying to steal the customers and send them to click threw referals

If this was not such a serious issue boarding on liable my legal adviser told me, this might be laughable, it s not tho

MORE INFO:
http://potterybarn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=14#14

**colbyt** · 03-16-2007, 07:54 PM

Your forum isn't going to be the problem. The fact that you are selling pottery on the main domain name is where the conflict lies.

If they have a trademark on the name potterybarn for pottery, I suggest you tuck your head between your knees and kiss your.......... Well you get the general concept.

**ADAM Web Design** · 03-17-2007, 12:47 AM

Dude, I'm Canadian and even I know what Pottery Barn is (it's not in my country).

No offense, dude, but you pulled your own pants down and asked for it on this one. First off, you knew full well about the EU and US trademarks on the name Pottery Barn...you've even acknowledged it on your own website. That means you don't get to use the name to sell other stuff, whether it competes with their sales or not. It's a trademark. It belongs to them. The end.

I don't understand how you could have been so naive as to believe that you could just go about conducting business under a domain name matching a company name that was trademarked to someone else. What if you used coca-cola.co.uk and your company name was Coca-Cola Collectables? Or maybe nike.net for "Nike Clocks and Things, Inc."? Do you think they would come after you? You're **** right they would!!! You're not a shady character from the sounds of it, but at the very least you're guilty of not doing your homework.

This is a no-brainer. You don't have any legal footing. You'll be lucky if they just let you hand over the domain name and don't try to take anything else away from you. Face it, you're screwed. Like colbyt said, tuck our head between your knees and pucker up, buttercup. Game over.

**gsmile** · 03-17-2007, 12:54 AM

^Exactly. It might've been fine if you didn't try selling anything on the site. You even stated on the site that you knew what the EU & US trademarks with that name exist.
I hope you learned your lesson and won't try that again next time-- or at least think about the domain name before you buy/sell anything on it.

**ADAM Web Design** · 03-17-2007, 01:11 AM

Additional information of some relevance is here:

http://www.adultforums.com/plus/print.exe?who=tittenworld&id=4285.5071745584773

(NOTE: this does not contain any nudity...just an idea of what the domain has been used for in what appears to be the very recent past.) No wonder Williams-Sonoma is pissed.

It hasn't been changed since November 29, 2006, either:

http://whois.domaintools.com/potterybarn.org

Interesting WHOIS email address, too.

And here's another link, from January 12:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/237593/thread/1168638269/At+pottery+barn+we+list+thousands+of+resources+wor ldwide+and+adult+contacts+worldwide,+if

Note to the mods: I'm not sure whether the examples of the adult links I cited above would be okay (they're ONLY there because they show what the domain was used for, nothing more). But if you want to remove them, I'd understand. Just please leave this one (not adult, but it shows the adult SERPs):

http://www.google.com/search?q=potte...hl=en&filter=0

And of course, more evidence here that something is rotten in the state of Denmark:

http://www.potterybarn.org/potterybarn_directory.php

The 46,000 adult links might just pose a problem for the reputation of Pottery Barn and I can really start to see why they're pissed. Nothing like a porno trail on a domain name that happens to be trademarked to someone else to get some large corporations going. They're so *****y sometimes!

**awt22** · 03-17-2007, 01:26 AM

sorry theres been a lack of information provided by me

I'm from the UK, and i did not no what pottery barn was until they contacted me and i looked into the matter

I registered this domain 7 years ago

just recent nov 2006 they mistaken have asummed that a domain yearly renewal was rfirst registertain

Once i first purchased the start is was all to do with collectable pottery, which is the trade i'm in, a dealer based in the uk, running a comapny which has been in excistance for 25 years

This comapny is a registered UK Company trading in the uk call POTTERYBARN COLLECTABLES LIMITED , I HAVE UK PATENTS PENDING

As for the trademark issue , once i became aware of it, the usa and ec mark that is, i have followed the icann riles on such matters and clearly stated that my site is nothing to do with there

i could of course just place a small acknowledgement - so of course there customers are not confused

Being a uk business tradeing in old collectable specialist pottery is now shady or evil, if you looked at the there submitted info you will find it is full of errors, slanders my intensions and trys to paint me as some evil doer on the net as i own over 150 domains

Its a joke really, i have checked the icann domain distupe records and quess what, they done it before a couple of years ago, exctauly the same matrial, slightly reworded, in that case the respondent, owner of domain never responded to icann, that cause them to loose the right and ownership was transerfered to them

It strange
If they say they contacted me on nov 2007 when i registered domain how come i have own it 7 years

they have gone in to my web directory and selected adult picture rating content adult based, which is pulled from the odp, and said this is reason why i'm a evil person

its funny really - i have no doubt i will clear my name and keep control of this domain - you whould not expect such a large company to use devisous means tho to try and gain someone else business asstts for there gain, they are munlipulating the icaann domain dispute forums for there own gains - and like a german sniper on call of duty 3 , i have 3 stripes now, you no what that means, if you play as americans

**ADAM Web Design** · 01:34 AM

Mmm hmm. 7 years, eh? Just to make sure you don't go back and edit that quote:

Quote:

I'm from the UK, and i did not no what pottery barn was until they contacted me and i looked into the matter

I registered this domain 7 years ago

And from the WHOIS site mentioned earlier:

Quote:

Domain ID

70108201-LROR
Domain Name:POTTERYBARN.ORG
Created On:30-Apr-2001 04:04:28 UTC

Let's see...April 30, 2001 was my nephew's third birthday. He turns 9 on April 30 of this year. That's...less than six years, not more than seven.

You're right. This is a joke. And you're the punchline.

One more thing: if this is some bizarre viral marketing indirectly-related-to-the-actual-product-or-service-being-sold-a-la-Super-Greg deal, you're off to a really bad start and probably will get called out on it. Besides that, they don't work (just ask Buddy Lee Jeans and Court TV).

**awt22** · 03-17-2007, 01:38 AM

this is serious man, i'm going to have to sort a response , spend lots of money and do lots of work

wait to you view the full info to make judegements, there are eveil doing involved here, which could make some news/media compnay a nice story

**ForrestCroce** · 03-17-2007, 04:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by awt22

some evil doer on the net as i own over 150 domains

Well that seals it.

I mean, just the title of this thread is silly enough. Seriously, what where you thinking when you bought a domain name that's identical to the name of a popular company? They didn't have Google when you registered the domain, back in 2001? Funny how the .com wasn't available, isn't it? Maybe Pottery Barn didn't exist way back then? Nope, they've been around since 1949, long before the internet and icann.

In Seattle, we hang domain squatters from the Space Needle. Microsoft is encouraging other companies to launch the kind of lawsuits you find yourself in. The last one, not only was the defendant forced to surrender the domain, but $45,000 along with it. Not a very good return on investment, but that's really the only tool there is.

Normally I wouldn't applaud Microsoft helping other large corporations sue individuals. Being the little guy doesn't help when you're in the wrong though. This was obviously a big mistake, but not an honest one. Using another company's ( or another person's ) name for your own profit is a small scale hijacking. Having 150 of them is in extremely bad faith, there's just no good reason "the little guy" needs or wants to deal with that. I have two.

I'm guessing all the adult links started showing up after the real Pottery Barn didn't want to pay some foolishly high price for their name?

**WebSavvy** · 03-17-2007, 10:15 AM

Hi Adam

OK, Adam dragged (lured) me here because he made a post about this on another forum we both belong to.

I live in the US (born here) and honestly, I've never heard of Pottery Barn.

It's quite possible that the OP is telling the truth. If he does have an established business (PotteryBarn Collectibles, Ltd.) of 25 years as he states, this would easily be verifiable and also provide him with legal right (and protection) to use any part of his business name as his domain name.

There was a case a few years ago where a young man named Mike Rowe (a student) was a freelance software developer. He purchased the domain name:
mikerowesoft.com ( because his birth name IS MIKE ROWE).

Anyway, short of it is, the greedy deep pocket giant -> microsoft.com
came after this kid and demanded the domain name.

Microsoft.com and mikerowesoft.com are not even close to being spelled in a similar manner. Maybe the microsoft rep was just blind or something?

Deep pockets took this young student to court. Donations and support came in for this kid from everywhere. He stood his ground, and he won the case -- and microsoft.com came out of it wearing a good deal of egg.

If the OP is telling the truth, and has tangible evidence that will legally support his claims to fair usage of the name PotteryBarn (because it's part of his REGISTERED business name) he may very well end up winning this case.

Trade Marks are very funny things. Something as simple as a space or no space between the words can be enough to turn the tide in favor of the would-be-offender.

(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV. I am not giving legal advice and everything I have stated thus far is merely my own opinion.)

To the OP:
I suggest you seek out adequate legal representation in the UK.

**ADAM Web Design** · 03-17-2007, 10:22 AM

Hey Deb!

For those who don't know who she is, Deb runs a really cool web directory at www.websavvy.cc and is a VERY smart cookie.

**ADAM Web Design** · 03-17-2007, 03:39 PM

Anyway, as far as Deb's points are concerned, I'd have to respectfully (and yes, this is someone that deserves respect) disagree, and here's why:

1) The domain has been used not once, but twice on adult boards in January of 2007 to promote porn. Whether it's an add-on feature or whether it's the whole site really isn't relevant...the fact is that it was used to promote something other than "collectables", and it's reasonably safe to assume from the fact that the site itself was in whole or large part promoting adult material, NOT collectables. (See the two posts above.)

2) The DMOZ adult listing pull. Whether or not that was supplied for free is irrelevant...webmasters have the ability to choose some or all of the DMOZ listings, and this guy chose to pull the adult portion.

As far as the whole Mike Rowe Soft thing is concerned, yeah it was his name but he clearly used a play on a bigger company. He knew what he was doing, and knew he had a loophole due to his name. I don't have a problem with that personally, since 1) he never was plugging porn and 2) the system in this case allowed the loophole.

In this case, there isn't really a loophole that's apparent UNLESS he does indeed have a limited company registration in the UK, and given his short history of lying already, I'd personally doubt that he does. If he did, why wasn't the collectables store there in the first place?

**ForrestCroce** · 03-17-2007, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

Anyway, as far as Deb's points are concerned, I'd have to respectfully (and yes, this is someone that deserves respect) disagree, and here's why:

Hopefully she'll stick around. I'll have to go check out her site when I have some time later on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

As far as the whole Mike Rowe Soft thing is concerned, yeah it was his name but he clearly used a play on a bigger company. He knew what he was doing, and knew he had a loophole due to his name. I don't have a problem with that personally, since 1) he never was plugging porn and 2) the system in this case allowed the loophole.

Well, honestly, I think Microsoft really out to own rights to Microsoft.com ( and .biz and whatnot ) by virtue of their having the name. This is probably more important for people who are actually trying to figure something out, like how to make a particular app work properly, and bumping up against clearly bad results. But it's also on general principal. Mike Rowe should also own the rights to that as a domain name, I can see a registrar charging for the work they do, but I don't think I should be allowed to register MikeRowe.com and put up a lot of content to embarrass the guy. This is a funny example. I can see both sides have a point; try saying the domain out loud.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

In this case, there isn't really a loophole that's apparent UNLESS he does indeed have a limited company registration in the UK, and given his short history of lying already, I'd personally doubt that he does. If he did, why wasn't the collectables store there in the first place?

In the US, part of starting a business usually involves a fictitious business name, which involves doing a search for other companies with that name first. If you're running the company under your given name this isn't necessary, but if you're using anything else, it is. 25 years ago, Pottery Barn was still in existence.

Also, if any of us needs an escort, we know where to look. Coincidence? Do people make sex pottery? I really wouldn't be surprised if that was "blackmail," as in buy my domain for $20,000, or I'll embarrass you with it.

**awt22** · 07:02 PM

Hold on a seconud and let me expain this situation fully so you all can make a better judegement

a) i'm from the uk i have no knowledge of the usa comapny with a similar doamin to myself - now that i am aware of confilctlibg marks that might cause web users misunderstandings - i have clearing made my website compliy with a trademark complaince notice

i think i'm making more of this than i need to, based on the icann rules themseles, clearly i have nothing to woryy abouty

1) in the whoistolls report, you can see a caputure of my site in a different design with pottery releated info dated 2002

2) WSI owners of the pottery space barn mark in the usa, and eu state ( as legal fact i might add) i purchased this domain in 2006, in order to steal/ lure customers away from the website. They must of course mistaken a renewal for first registeration and viewing the issue from this viewpoint i can understand the mistakes they have futher made.

3) WSI used a holding page on my site, during a server transfer, dated 2006 and saed this was when it was first set up, no reverfance is made to peorvious incarnations.

4) they contacted me offering to purchase the doamin in 2006, i refused and CLEARLY Explained my interest in the doamin and told them about the potterybarn collectables company i have own been in connection with for the past 16 years, they venture was infact start by my friends father who is no passed away, has been passed down now to three generations

4) Even tho i choose to use all the odp info, I think they have no right to say what i can and can not place on my domain, this data was not a pull , infact is a data extract dated around late 2006 , i have not removed the adult sections. As there are over 16667 cats and 2.5 million links and 7 gigs of content pages in total all diven threw the propular links sql script

The adult section of odp only consists of around 5% of the directory info, and i have clearly stated these conatin adult content.

5) as for the slander of my character and the so called bad use , i think there grapsing at really thin straws here

This hole dispute is set to fall at the first hurdle

There are 3 rules reguarding a domain name dispute the must met in order for icann to delete my domain or transfer it over to the

1) The are trademark issues realeated : and

2) the website is not and has not been in use, and the person who owns it has no rights or interests in said domain

3) the owner of the domain is engaugaed in bad faith

There claims do not fall down on just one point , they fall down on all three
they way this big company has used / twisted and prverted the icann domain dispute process in oder to gain control of another companys assets in very doubus

In there statements of fact, there are clear errors , which of course they might have overlooked or convinatly forgotten

How come it took the webmaster who saved my life, 5 mins to find the old whois records with a screen capture dated 2002 with my site in opertain, and this company never had access to that info

I am in the process of conatacting icaan as soon as the open on monaday to clearly point out that facts presented to them, on which they are going to make a legal descision are incorrect.

In a britsh court of law, i whould simply walk away from this and theres simply no case to answer

My uk limited comapny is called POTTERYBARN COLLECTABLES LIMITED, i have uk patents pending to project myself for any future actions. We have been operating as a specialist pottery collectables company on and off for over 25 years

There is no POTTERY BARN UK trademark, they have a USA and EU one, as a uk citizen operating under uk laws and paying taxs to the uk goverment, i'm quite sure i'm ok in what i'm doing

This is a clear case of a large company bulling a small one man band

It clearly states in the domain name dispute processs that this action cann't be used in a attempt to bulling or harrass

As for the sale of the domain there never been any question I DO NOT WISH TO SELL they where writing letters emailing and telephoneing asking to purchase the doamin - offering first $250 $500 then $5000, i clearly pointed out that this domain was used for a speailest pottery collectables website, that being running for years, i mentioned i had spent lots of time and effort devoping the website many times over the year, i also mentioned i gad around £5,000 of stock

They have twisted information, provided false information to try to met icann rules for this typre of case

This is a story which has merits, i'm sure theres someone out there with a media/news who whould get a good story from me if they wanted to

at this point i have not pulished the domain name dispute filing with my response as i'm not sure if i'm allowed to, hopfully when i nofify icann and WSI themselves that the information they provided is not actual fact , they will simply diismiss this casE on evalueation or WSI themselves will withdraw the complaint.

**WebSavvy** · 03-17-2007, 08:39 PM

Adam, I wasn't aware that the site had been used as a p0rn site. I just viewed the whois records and even the contact email is that of "escort" (which both instances are highly disgusting, IMO).

Having the DMOZ "adult category" on a "pottery" website, doesn't make any sense and it also doesn't look very professional for a "Business" website to do this.

I know if I were in the market for pottery (which I am NOT) and I came across this site and saw that category, I'd leave and not do business with that site.

Adult related subject matter does not belong on a pottery BUSINESS website.

**awt22** · 03-17-2007, 09:00 PM

I have now deleted the hole adult section out of my site - the setup up of the links direcory and import of data of the complete odp dataset seems to be a problem that might cause other poeple problems so i will bow done to good advise and resolve the issue right now

**colbyt** · 03-17-2007, 09:41 PM

You may have owned the domain for all those years but all you did is sit on it.

You never got around to putting up a site of any type until JUne of 2004.

Your current site which is causing you the problems came sometime after that.

Before you say I am wrong, may I suggest you look at this:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://potterybarn.org

**ADAM Web Design** · 03-17-2007, 11:49 PM

Deb's gonna hate me for doing this, but I've got to say something: awt22, you seriously need to start running your posts through a spelling and grammar checker. They're getting PAINFUL to read.

Your only saving grace, if that, is that your UK limited company MIGHT hold water vs. the European union trademark. The flaw in all that is that the UK is part of the EU and therefore would presumably be included in terms of the boundary of that trademark (much as a North American trademark would include Mexico, the US and Canada).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europea...#Member_states (****...WikiPedia's useful!)

As far as the three things that must hold true, at least two of them DO hold true:

From http://www.icann.org/dndr/udrp/policy.htm :

Quote:

a. Applicable Disputes. You are required to submit to a mandatory administrative proceeding in the event that a third party (a "complainant") asserts to the applicable Provider, in compliance with the Rules of Procedure, that

(i) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and

(ii) you have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

(iii) your domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

Potterybarn.org is confusingly similar to Pottery Barn, so 1)'s true. 3) is true because it was being used in bad faith (to promote p0rn...I stole from ya, Deb.)

The only thing you may have a case with is 2...IF your company is indeed a UK limited organization. I personally don't believe you, however; you've already been caught lying and then rewording the situation, and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see this go the way Forrest predicted (fake business name).

It also appears that there are both EU and UK trademarks registered for the "Pottery Barn" name to Williams-Sonoma.

http://www.patent.gov.uk/tm/t-find/t...atusselected=A

At the very least, they precede the registration of the domain name. They may well precede your "business registration", assuming it actually does exist.

http://oami.europa.eu/CTMOnline/Requ...en_SearchBasic <-- this houses the EU trademarks, although I can't link to the results...this thing's a bit awkward to use and does form posts.

Give it up, dude. This is already getting old.

**ADAM Web Design** · 03-17-2007, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Hopefully she'll stick around. I'll have to go check out her site when I have some time later on.

Agreed. She really does have a lot of valuable input to add. Trust me on this one. I don't always agree with everything she says (then again, I don't always agree with everything anyone says...vive la difference), but she's got good intentions and tries to do right by users, so she's got my respect...and you guys know I don't just hand that out.

**Republikin** · 03-18-2007, 08:26 AM

I find it hard to believe that you guys are all so quick to judge this guy and call him a liar. All of the evidence you guys have provided against him is circumstantial at best. So what if he feels the need to deal in porn, thats his prerogative; whether it makes business sense or not its his decision and first thing you guys assume he put it up to slander the US based company. Also, so he advertised his "other" services on an adult forum, I for one am willing to give him a benefit of a doubt and assume that he did not do this with the intention of slandering Pottery Barn; perhaps he really did just want to attract others of a like mind, what a criminal eh?

So he sat on the domain name for a couple of years, how many of you haven't sat on a domain name for a long time while trying to muster up the effort, will, skill, etc to finish a project.

I hope that I don't ever have a legitimate problem that I want to bring to light in front of "my peers". I would be afraid that first things first I would be assumed a liar and then have to prove to you guys that I wasn't trying to scam someone.