PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Sting Stung By Sting
July 28th 2000, 19:40 CEST by andy

Quake player Michael Urvan, who uses the online alias Sting, has successfully defended his claim to the domain name Sting.com. The ownership had been challenged by the musician of the same name.



Sting, the musician, whose real name is Gordon Sumner, complained to the World Intellectual Property Organisation on the basis that Urvan's domain name was identical to the unregistered trademark and service mark Sting. He also claimed that Urvan had no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name, and that an alleged offer to transfer the domain name for $25,000 showed it had been registered in bad faith.

If these allegations had been proved, Urvan would have been in violation of WIPO's policy on domain ownership, and could have been ordered to cancel or transfer the domain name.

Sumner claimed that Urvan had made no use of the domain name from when it was registered in July 1995 until early this year. In the complaint to the WIPO arbitration panel, he claimed that once contacted about ownership of Sting.com, Urvan linked the domain name to the gun trading site, GunBroker.com, and then to a series of unofficial Sting sites.

Urvan acknowledged that the site had been linked to GunBroker.com, but said this only happened for a short time and had been an error on the part of his service provider. He explains on the site: "GunBroker is the default IP address. [...] My brother is the owner of GunBroker.com. He graciously hosts this site for free." Sting.com and GunBroker.com are both hosted by LeaseAnAuction.com.

Sumner also alleged that in February of this year, and then again in May, Urvan had offered to sell the domain name to him for $25,000. Urvan denied this, saying that he had had no contact with Sumner before May 16, and that the first contact had been initiated by Sumner's representative.

The sole WIPO arbitrator reviewing the case ruled that Sumner had failed to prove his claims. The ruling was due, in part, to the fact that 'sting' is a common English word with several meanings. The arbitrator also ordered that Sumner's request to submit a reply be denied.

C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Sting Stung By Sting

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "Baytor"
2000-07-28 19:43:26
baytor@yahoo.com http://www.geocities.com/baytor
Sting sux!!!!

Metallica roxs!!!!


I... AM BAYTOR!!!!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#2 by "Baytor"
2000-07-28 19:44:02
baytor@yahoo.com http://www.geocities.com/baytor
<b>#1</b> "Baytor" wrote...
<QUOTE>

Sting sux!!!!

Metallica roxs!!!!
</QUOTE>

Sorry, couldn't resist.  And, FIRST, again.

I... AM BAYTOR!!!!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#3 by "Anonymous RisanetIRCop"
2000-07-28 19:44:37
Derek Smart is a baby opps wrong topic
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#4 by "Baytor"
2000-07-28 19:47:32
baytor@yahoo.com http://www.geocities.com/baytor
<b>#3</b> "Anonymous RisanetIRCop" wrote...
<QUOTE>

Derek Smart is a baby opps wrong topic
</QUOTE>

Hey, I wonder... if we talk about Derek here, how long will it take him to find us?

I... AM BAYTOR!!!!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#5 by "BloodKnight"
2000-07-28 19:47:43
bloodknight@somethingawful.com
Oh god, more morons in the world.  Welcome to the internet, first come, first serve.  Unless you are talking about someone's name of course (and a group name and a nick name don't count)

<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#6 by "Anonymous RisanetIRCop"
2000-07-28 19:52:10
think he's smart enough to look in the other topics?<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#7 by "Frijoles"
2000-07-28 19:55:48
IMHO, Sting should have just paid the guy and be done with it. Perhaps his music business isn't so great anymore though. It just seems that after you pay X amount for lawyers and legal fees, you are better off just paying the site owner off.

Frij
#8 by "Darkseid-[D!]"
2000-07-28 19:55:48
darkseid-d@planetcrap.com http://www.captured.com/boomstick
Hrm

movie 'The Sting' in the early 70's

american wrestler, 'Sting'



dont think they could rule for 'one' instance of the common word



then again certain companies tried to copyright the colour of their logo ...


Ds<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#9 by "Baytor"
2000-07-28 20:01:58
baytor@yahoo.com http://www.geocities.com/baytor
It looks like Sing, the musician, was trying to make the case that Sting, the game player, had bought the rights to the domain name for predatory practices--thus his story of being offered the name for $25,000.  Of course, I find the story a little preposterous since I can't imagine someone getting in touch with him without leaving some sort of paper trail--he is a celebrity of some note.

Which leaves you to the conclusion that Sting, the game player, was sincere in his bid for the domain name, and deserves it since he got their first.

I... AM BAYTOR!!!!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#10 by "superion"
2000-07-28 20:02:28
the real question is what's WCW wrestler Sting's offical stance on all of this.
#11 by "Jeffrey Powell"
2000-07-28 20:03:18
random1@speakeasy.org
What is the point of this topic?

is it, "Little guy triumphs in battle vs. top-dollar corp lawyers."

or is it, "Cybersquatting is alive and well."?

Just curious.  I don't really get a feel either way.

I've used the 'random' nick since the mid 80's, and have gotten used to seeing lots of other people using it.  I'm trying to remember how many different 'sting's I've seen online.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#12 by "Darkseid-[D!]"
2000-07-28 20:05:49
darkseid-d@planetcrap.com http://www.captured.com/boomstick
No the real question is ..


when is Jayyyyson 'King of teh Monstrars' Hall debutting in the WCW ....



:)


Ill be checking that sanity demo out later on


DS<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#13 by "Baytor"
2000-07-28 20:06:43
baytor@yahoo.com http://www.geocities.com/baytor
<b>#11</b> "Jeffrey Powell" wrote...
<QUOTE>What is the point of this topic?

is it, "Little guy triumphs in battle
vs. top-dollar corp lawyers."

or is it, "Cybersquatting is alive and
well."?

Just curious. I don't really get a feel either way.

</QUOTE>
I would imagine the even-handed approach is Andy's way of getting us to say what we think about this topic, other than what we think about what Andy thinks about this topic--not that we would ever stoop to something like that.  :)

I'm sure Andy will chime in around post #40 to tell us what he really thinks.

I... AM BAYTOR!!!!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#14 by "Mugwum"
2000-07-28 20:15:00
mugs@mailmonkey.org http://www.eurogamer.net
No, it's clearly another outlet for Derek Smart bashing under the guise of a domain dispute topic. For example, a lot of customers were "stung" by the original copy (and by the sound of it subsequent ones) of the game.

Okay, enough of this, he's very tiresome. Lets leave it for a few months then I'll do a topic on his falsified Ph.D or something. (It's not falsified, Derek? Prove it.)

But anyway, I think this is one of those cases that's so hard to prove either way. It seems logical that if someone were to register, say, Microsoft.to, and Microsoft the company could prove that it had a USE for the domain, or the registrant mis-used it, then they should have a claim to it. That is, unless there is more than one company called Microsoft, in which case the larger organisation (based on financial turnover, years of existence or something) should get it. Obviously a strict T&C agreement needs to be enforced prior to all this, but, oops, nobody could have predicted the growth and importance of the Internet. In the end all the decent domains seem to be taken now, and the system, while a bit messed up, hasn't killed anyone yet.

As such we're in a position where people's reasons for owning a domain can be legitimate, can be entrepereneurial, can be anything really, but the precedents have to be set as we go along. It's unfortunate, because it would be ever so much easier on everyone if it had been thought out in the first place.

Did we ever do a topic on Sex.com, which was hijacked? The owner was making over a million in banner ads a month off of it, and someone pinched it by falsifying email addresses. This has actually happened to me with one of my domains, and like the owner of Sex.com, I discovered there is no law or technicality under which is can be reclaimed to me.
#15 by "Warren Marshall"
2000-07-28 20:17:56
warren@epicgames.com http://www.epicgames.com
<quote>Oh god, more morons in the world. Welcome to the internet, first come, first serve. Unless you are talking about someone's name of course (and a group name and a nick name don't count)</quote>

I don't think that's true ... Isn't there some rule about legally registered trademarked names?  Like McDonalds?  I vaguely remember something about some guy registering "McDonalds.com" waaaaaay back in the early days and McDonalds corporation taking it away from him because it was their trademark.

I think if you trademark on a name and someone takes your domain you can get it back.
#16 by "Baytor"
2000-07-28 20:21:16
baytor@yahoo.com http://www.geocities.com/baytor
<b>#14</b> "Mugwum" wrote...
<QUOTE>

Did we ever do a topic on Sex.com, which was hijacked? The owner was making over a million in banner ads a month off of it, and someone pinched it by falsifying email addresses. This has actually happened to me with one of my domains, and like the owner of Sex.com, I discovered there is no law or technicality under which is can be reclaimed to me. </QUOTE>

This reminds me, have you ever been to www.whitehouse.com?  It's a porn site, and probrably the offical White House porn site :)  

It's a fairly common practice for people to pick someone else's name as a domain name in order to get cheap hits or to sell to the true owner at a considerable mark-up.  In this particular case, it doesn't appear as though either of those two things happened.

I... AM BAYTOR!!!!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#17 by "avixe"
2000-07-28 20:26:11
jsg@fiam.net
And Network Solutions auctions off the domain names that expire, too. It's a brave new [awful] corporate world out there. Thank god they found the internet quickly, as otherwise it might've been pretty cool.
#18 by "Jeffrey Powell"
2000-07-28 20:33:37
random1@speakeasy.org
<b>#17</b> "avixe" wrote...
<QUOTE>


And Network Solutions auctions off the domain names that expire, too. It's a
brave new [awful] corporate world out there. Thank god they found the internet
quickly, as otherwise it might've been pretty cool. </QUOTE>


Yes, but without all of the corps' money, most users would not have a fraction of the bandwidth, or the available ( interesting ) content that they do today.

The Internet was pretty cool before the corporate invasion, and it is still pretty cool.  
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#19 by "EvilAsh"
2000-07-28 20:35:05
evilash@eviladam.com http://www.eviladam.com
Actually The wrestler Sting has copyrighted this before STing the musician did.

:)
#20 by "alien8"
2000-07-28 20:37:13
alien@planetunreal.com http://www.planetunreal.com
<b>#15</b> "Warren Marshall" wrote...
<QUOTE>


<quote>Oh god, more morons in the world. Welcome to the internet, first come, first serve. Unless you are talking about someone's name of course (and a group name and a nick name don't count)</quote>

I don't think that's true ... Isn't there some rule about legally registered trademarked names? Like McDonalds? I vaguely remember something about some guy registering "McDonalds.com" waaaaaay back in the early days and McDonalds corporation taking it away from him because it was their trademark.
</QUOTE>

Jeeezus, that's frickin' /weak/.  I wonder what all the legal stipulations to that would be.  Also, what are the procedures to go about trademarking a name?

If I trademarked alien8, could I get that domain (<a href="http://www.alien8.com/">www.alien8.com</a>) from <a href="http://www.domainshosted.com/">DomainsHosted.com</a> for free instead of the $7500 they are currently asking?

Hmmm...

-alien8<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#21 by "Milky"
2000-07-28 20:44:13
chris@verbalchilli.com http://www.verbalchilli.com
I'm not quite sure what Sting is complaining about. I know I'd be overjoyed to have his current domain name, sting.compaq.com.

Wouldn't you?

Seriously though, I think I have to disagree with the WIPO on this one however since Sting (the gamer) was clearly taking the piss for quite a while before actually putting up a site which isn't very good anyway and is little more than a poorly designed collection of links and several pages telling the world how good he is because he was lucky enough to keep rights to the domain.

If I wasn't so crap at Quake, I'd go and beat him at it.
#22 by "DevPac2"
2000-07-28 21:08:05
devpac2@hotmail.com
OT :

Ack, this is going to sound a little patronising (its not meant to be), but i think that the last two stories which have been presented by Andy were really good articles. Factual and with very little opinion, which was rightly saved for the comments section. PC is better for it imo.

Dev
#23 by "Warren Marshall"
2000-07-28 21:27:24
warren@epicgames.com http://www.epicgames.com
<quote>If I trademarked alien8, could I get that domain (www.alien8.com) from DomainsHosted.com for free instead of the $7500 they are currently asking?</quote>

I don't mean they "gave" it to McDonalds ... I'm sure they made them pay for it like everyone else.  :)

It might be different now ... I've never tried to register a domain name, so I have no idea how it works.

But I think if you own a trademarked name, and you can show the person who owns that domain is just sitting there (i.e. has no site there to speak of), you can get it taken away from them and you'll be allowed to buy it instead.

Of course, there's an excellent chance I'm talking out of my ass, so...   :)
#24 by "deadlock"
2000-07-28 21:52:00
deadlock@eircom.net
To be quite honest, I don't see the value of having a .com domain these days anyway, seeing as the world and it's brother can get their hands on one easily. The commercial value no longer exists, as far as I'm concerned. I'd rather got to - say - IrishNews.<b>ie</b> over IrishNews.com anyday. All I can say is it's a good thing that the IEDR (IE Domain Registration, who allocate .ie - Irish - domains) are very fucking finicky and stipulate all sortsa complicated shit that me and my cousin are trying to wade through at the moment.

anyhoo.

deadlock
#25 by "deadlock"
2000-07-28 21:52:57
deadlock@eircom.net
Oh yeah, I heard on the radio the other day that there are going to be far more domains available soon anyway, so we could see sting.treehugginghippymusobastard quite soon.

deadlock
#26 by "None-1a"
2000-07-28 22:18:24
none1a@home.com http://www.geocities.com/none-1a/
<b>#25</b> "deadlock" wrote...
<QUOTE>Oh yeah, I heard on the radio the other day that there are going to be far more
domains available soon anyway, so we could see sting.treehugginghippymusobastard
quite soon</QUOTE>

Um, not really a lot of em. At this point ICANN is still considering what the new top level domains are going to be (some places are selling them, byt ICANN has not anounced what the new dot whatever are going to be). They should have a desision made by the end of the year, when they officaly indorse the names being sold. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#27 by "lechifre"
2000-07-28 22:56:33
lechifre@btinternet.com http://www.sting.com
Hey hang on a second here folks, aren't we forgetting something here.

The right of the entrepreneur to make money off other people without respect for any one else's rights;
Big companies rip us off left right and centre, day in day out. Our health suffers as the tobacco companies grow rich, the ecosystem suffers as companies pump pollution out as fast as they can, etc.... whinge, whinge, whinge....
Commerce is all about fucking every other dude on the planet up the ass with the biggest scariest dildo you can find, and then charging the poor bleeding fool for the wear and tear on your equipment. Commerce is about making money, nothing else.

Dosen't anyone else find it ironic that commerce is complaining that "web squatting" is unfair, that its "morally wrong"? God forsake that the little guy should try and squeeze a few pennies back out of the conglomerates that bleed him dry daily?
Fuck they're just jealous that they didn't get there first.
If the internet had been the product/sprung from a commercial venture then you can bet all you don't own that companies would be paying through the nose for thier respecive domains. What web squatters are charging wouldn't even cover the lawyer's phone calls to buy a domain.
#28 by "Desiato"
2000-07-29 00:26:17
desiato_hotblack@hotmail.com http://www.spew2.com/
Just to reiterate - TLD's like Network Solutions are full of shit.

And I can say that -- I registered my domain with an overseas registrar, and I'm happy as hell with it.

I would love to see the proliferation of other domains, like .xxx .tv , etc.. (Why xxx? It would be easier as an admin to block a whole shitload of pr0n at work...yes, I have the regrettable position of dealing with blocking dumbasses from pr0n.)

Anyway...sting lost, but hell -- get creative stingboy....he doesn't *have* to use sting.com...there are other choices..

Desiato
#29 by "AmbushBug"
2000-07-29 00:32:55
ambushbug@portalofevil.com
Regarding the issue with the Mcdonalds.com domain -

I remember a few years ago reading an article in Wired magazine which was describing how unprepared major corporations were in regards to getting domain names registered.

To illustrate the point the guy writing the article registered mcdonalds.com to himself and then called up mcdonalds and asked them what they thought about it.

I seem to remember in the story that he had or was planning to hand over the domain name to micky-d's for little or no cost.

I don't know what eventually happened but it was an interesting article.

-AB
#30 by "Arkan"
2000-07-29 01:57:30
arkan@evem.org.au http://www.evem.org.au/
The Wired story is at http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.10/mcdonalds.html
#31 by "None-1a"
2000-07-29 04:45:30
none1a@home.com http://www.geocities.com/none-1a
<b>#28</b> "Desiato" wrote...
<QUOTE>I would love to see the proliferation of other domains, like .xxx .tv , etc..
(Why xxx? It would be easier as an admin to block a whole shitload of pr0n at
work...yes, I have the regrettable position of dealing with blocking dumbasses
from pr0n.)

</QUOTE>

Acctauly it looks like they'll be .sex, unfortinitly unless some law requires that all porn sites use it your job will be just as hard as normal (I don't see that happening considering the number of em out there just waiting to kill any requirement like that)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#32 by "Schlag!"
2000-07-29 06:13:56
toddgod@yahoo.com
This reminds me a bit of the Frys.com saga... Fry's is a smasll chain of gigantic shitty software/electronics/computer stores in (mostly) the west and southwest. They sued, and won against the domain owners of Fry's.com (a family in Oregon who made French Fry making equipment); I've often wondered how they won, given that "frys" is a fairly generic term... "Sting" to me falls under the same category; post #27 said it best, and Gordon Sumner is hardly going to get any of my sympathy, even if Sting the game player had offered to sell him the domain name. It's not like the prick can't afford it.

I note, with some dismay, that Schlag.com has been taken. Maybe I can sue?
#33 by "Ambushbug"
2000-07-29 07:29:13
ambushbug@portalofevil.com
Hey! I bought my last power supply at Frys!

..of course, it was overpriced... :)
#34 by "G-Man"
2000-07-29 12:57:43
jonmars@shiftlock.org http://www.shiftlock.org
I believe that the current DNS architecture will become more and more irrelevant (not to mention obsolete... ipv6 anyone?), as the internet develops, due to the growing proliferation of intelligent agents, dot-branding, push content, and ubiquitous computing. Which sadly makes this something of a non-issue for me.

 - [g.man]<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#35 by "flamethrower"
2000-07-29 19:13:04
flamey_at_evil@hotmail.com http://flamethrower.evilavatar.com
Sting, Gordon Summers edition, is utterly repugnant.

He goes on about being a tree hugging hippy bastard, save the rainforrest, be kind to the earth, be kind to animals, social equality, blah-de-blah-de-blah.

And what is he currently advertising on British TV? Top-end <b>Jaguar Cars</b>.

Cars for rich fat bastards, with LEATHER seats, WALNUT trim, and do <b>NINE</b> MILES TO THE GALLON.

IE, help REALLY FUCKING KILL THE PLANT.

He should be looking to register the (currently available) www.<b>Gordon-Summers-Is-A-Two-Faced-Cunt</b>.org


Because he's a two-faced cunt, that is.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#36 by "deadlock"
2000-07-30 14:59:00
deadlock@eircom.net
Yeah yeah, the only green Sting's interested in is the american dollar. sell out bastard. as for that moby bloke. grrrrr....

deadlock
#37 by "Sgt.Seb"
2000-07-31 08:44:33
Oi nothing wrong with moby.  'Selling out' and making a lot of money because the spice girl 'mainstream' finally realised they have shit taste in music and start buying moby cds is a big difference.

but yeah, sting is a gimp.
#38 by "Dethstryk"
2000-07-31 15:44:17
dethstryk@damagegaming.com http://www.damagegaming.com/
<b>Sgt.Seb wrote in post #37:</b>
<quote>Oi nothing wrong with moby. 'Selling out' and making a lot of money because the spice girl 'mainstream' finally realised they have shit taste in music and start buying moby cds is a big difference.</quote>
Personally, I don't think Moby sold out. I'm just disgusted that he can put out that "Play" CD that has essentially the same damn song over and over on it for for the 20 or whatever tracks are on there.

I used to be a big fan of the man back when he was doing MODs and good techno, but this stealing from old soul records shit and putting it on a beat is just crap. Did I mention all of it sounds the same?


--
Dethstryk
Damage Gaming
#39 by "Doom Trooper"
2000-07-31 16:49:42
doomtrooper@planetquake.com http://www.planetquake.com/futurewar
hey, rappers have been doing it for years.

(let's have another music thread! wooohooo!)
#40 by "wayfinder"
2000-07-31 19:57:54
http://www.azure-music.com
<quote>I used to be a big fan of the man back when he was doing MODs and good techno, but this stealing from old soul records shit and putting it on a beat is just crap. Did I mention all of it sounds the same?
</quote>

you're thinking of a different moby (fred motte)



----
way-fu, exercise today!
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#41 by "Dethstryk"
2000-07-31 23:37:57
dethstryk@damagegaming.com http://www.damagegaming.com/
<b>wayfinder wrote in post #40:</b>
<quote>you're thinking of a different moby (fred motte)</quote>
You're shitting me?

So, the Moby from the MOD scene isn't the same Moby that has the Play album out? Damn that needs to be made more clear.. I know a lot of people who think that. Thanks for clearing it up!


--
Dethstryk
Damage Gaming
#42 by "bagofmice"
2000-08-01 00:39:15
rcastle@microsoft.com
<quote> IE, help REALLY FUCKING KILL THE PLANT. </quote>

Uhm, quick biology lesson. Plants "breathe" CO2. technically he's REALLY FUCKING FEEDING THE PLANT
#43 by "bagofmice"
2000-08-01 00:40:57
rcastle@microsoft.com
Play moby did all kinds of music, including punk-core 1000 beats per minute stuff (no, I'm not kidding)
#44 by "Nemesis"
2000-08-01 03:58:39
stevenlawton@thefreeinternet.co.uk
Moby kicks ass big style...his set at glastonbury was amazing I was expecting it to be chilled out like the album

boy was I mistaken.
#45 by "Protein"
2000-08-03 06:58:39
protein@go.com
The funniest thing is that i know a guy at work who is essentially a cyber-squatter.

The guy is currently shitting himself thinking that he won't be making millions selling domain names.

Hee Hee

I'd have some sympathey, but the guy is a real wanker
#46 by "Craig"
2000-08-16 06:19:12
craigl@globalnet.co.uk http://www.planetcrap.com/crapspy/
cs test..<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#47 by "Craig"
2000-08-16 06:20:13
craigl@globalnet.co.uk http://www.planetcrap.com/crapspy/
cs test 2..<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Sting Stung By Sting

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]