Apple wins iTunes.co.uk domain

Apple wins iTunes.co.uk domain
In an absolutely amazing decision, Apple has won the rights to the iTunes.co.uk domain, despite the fact that its owner Benjamin Cohen registered it years before Apple ever had the iTunes music service. AfterDawn reported that Apple had accused Cohen of cyber squatting, even though he registered the domain on 7th November 2000 whereas Apple were only had the trademark for "iTunes" published in the Trade Marks Journal on 6th December 2000. Benjamin Cohen is the chief executive of CyberBritain Holdings.

In October 2004, Cohen attempted to sell the domain to Napster but the offer was refused. Apple offered him $5,000 which he rejected and asked for $50,000. Domain Registrar Nominet has ruled that the name registration was abusive and that Apple had the rights to the brand. Of course, Cohen has said that he is determined to appeal the decision. During the case it is also reported that some unusual claims were made about Apple.



"The Respondent expressly said that the Expert appointed by Nominet should not be an Apple Mac user, because in the view of the Respondent there is a 'cult' associated with the products of the Complainant, which attract fanatical users," said Claire Milne, Nominet's independent expert adjudicating the case. In my opinion (and I'm sure a lot of yours) this decision was very unfair and I'm very interested in seeing what will be the outcome of an appeal.

Source:
Vnunet.com

Written by: James Delahunty @ 16 Mar 2005 3:03
Advertisement - News comments available below the ad
  • 47 comments

  • domie

    we all already know, there is virtually nothing that money and corporate clout canīt buy these days.
    they offered him $ 5,000 but couldnīt pay $ 50,000 i guess i will have to go out and buy 50 i-pods, times must be hard for them.
    brings new meaning to the expression "one bad apple"

    16.3.2005 03:38 #1

  • Rosco404

    That is terrable!!! I feel for Benjamin Cohen...

    16.3.2005 04:23 #2

  • SD2

    money money money its all you need.

    16.3.2005 04:58 #3

  • venomX05

    OH MY LORD!!!! YOU HAVE GOT TO BE FREAKING KIDDING ME???

    That is like a TOTAL slap in the face...who cares that he was cyber squatting on the domain name, he paid for it didn't he.

    Apple was SO damn cheap in offering him $5k, I would have spit in their face. They knew damn well that they could have paid him $50k for it.

    Anyways, I don't know about you all, but I WAS going to buy an IPOD, don't think I will now.

    Feel for the guy too....but I guess that is big business for ya!

    16.3.2005 05:13 #4

  • Quadratic

    That is the most bogus case I've seen in a while.

    I mean seriously, how can they rule in favor of Apple when he had the domain a month before them?

    16.3.2005 05:19 #5

  • joe777

    You know something I was posting on another thread earlier, the thread about the cloned ipod shuffle and one of the members said that they hope apple will sue the pants off the copy cats and basically he/she was sticking up for apple. I on the other hand reffered to apple as corporate nazis. Now this person made the following comment: WEll, like it or not punx777, luxpro are screwed.If you tihkn its right for them to do that, then why dont you design summit that's the market leader, i'll copy it exaclty, and add 'super' into the name, then watch as you eat your own words.

    Now I hope the person who wrote this will eat their words.Mr Cohen wouldn't appreciate your words of wisdom, but maybe you are young and dont even pay into the system yet, and you surely dont understand the meaning of corporate nazis. As you get older and see half of your hard earned cash going to the people that run our countries and of course the corporations who probably run most governments, you start to ask what is happenning. Bill Hicks summed it for america when he said "wake up america, you are free to do what we tell you to do" same for everyone really.

    16.3.2005 07:54 #6

  • Letukka

    Fine. This does it. Iīm not getting any products from this bitchassholecompany ever. Retards.

    16.3.2005 07:59 #7

  • dlc2000

    money is power , with lots of it anything can be done . who said money doesnt make the world go around ?

    16.3.2005 09:24 #8

  • pevelius

    eversince i bought a powerbook a year ago (my very first apple product) i have read this kind of crap from the company that represented "the small guy agains evil companies". i, too will definetly boycott apple totally.
    pity, powerbook is a really nice tool ;)
    well, when i want to buy a new computer itīll be 100% linux/bsd.

    16.3.2005 09:58 #9

  • MXGzX

    hahaha I'm glad apple won! have any of you actually been to his crap ass site? He tried selling it to napster? lol he's growing up to become quite a sleeze...

    16.3.2005 11:10 #10

  • VicRamano

    I bet that Apple paid well over the $50K for lawyer fees. I am a mac user and I think that Apple is f'n rediculous on how they seem to be handling things lately. It seems that they have been sue happy lately.

    16.3.2005 11:27 #11

  • venomX05

    Quote:It seems that they have been sue happy lately. How right you are...like Steve Jobbs suddenly wakes up and says,"Oh my God, I had the worst nightmare...I dreamt that I wasn't suing anyone for every little cotton picking thing, man that was scary....let me get my lawyers on the phone, someone is getting reammed today."
    Quote:I bet that Apple paid well over the $50K for lawyer fees. LOL! I could so believe that.....can we say...better money management.

    16.3.2005 11:37 #12

  • spooky2k

    Joe777:
    I dont think i will eat my words. I know exaclty what you mean about the whole corporate nazi thing..but its life. Its the way the world runs. Everyone has to live with it everyday, and i sure as hell would liek to do something abou tit. Bu tyou simply cannot copy a product identicaly and expect not to be sued. thats jsut stupid. i dont agree with apple winning on this case because the guy payed for the domain. Theres a big difference between the two...apple screwed a guy over here, and on the luxpro thing, they are trying to screw apple over unfairly. LuxPro will not win. If they do, im setting up a business to sell ipods as 'ePods' and i should be sorted for life.
    Its not so much how apple run their business, as say, common sense.
    Dan x

    16.3.2005 11:59 #13

  • Pop_Smith

    Quote: That is the most bogus case I've seen in a while.

    I mean seriously, how can they rule in favor of Apple when he had the domain a month before them?     This is VERY true, I mean if "iTunes" was registered after the site was made (as the article says) then Benjamin Cohen should be able to sue apple for using his site's name without permission :P

    16.3.2005 12:04 #14

  • jacsac

    The only difference between Bill Gay-tes and Steve b. Jobs is Steve-o did more drugs. Bill was afraid he might get bong water on his pocket protector.

    16.3.2005 13:11 #15

  • venomX05

    Pirates Of Silicon Valley explains it all!

    Love that movie!

    16.3.2005 13:18 #16

  • joe777

    No man you got it wrong, bill gates was applying for a patent (for the bong) whilst being shown how it worked. Spooky2k you are truely confused my friend.Pink floyd wrote a song especially for you its called "Have A Cigar" its on the album Wish You Were Here. You first said you know exactly what i was speaking about and then you went on to say thats life, then everyone has to live with it, then you would sure like to change it.But then you say its simply stupid what luxpro have done. Stupid maybe but i take my hat off to them for challenging the big guns and by supporting people like this you can see which side of the fence i am standing on. But you my friend you know what i mean about corporate nazis and you still choose to support apple. Why not support the others, and then you will be doing something about it, just like some other people posted that they would never buy any of the products again, of course is another way to show your dislike for what is going on.Apple got screwed unfairly? and what is your definition of fair in this day and age?. It might be a dog eat dog world but i hope the jack russel will do the business for us. And 1 last thing , if you make the epod and its a better price with more functions then put me down for 1 i will support you matey

    16.3.2005 14:10 #17

  • spooky2k

    if you'd support me andd expect me not to get my ass sued off, or not want to, then your confused between supporting someone whos a worthy cause supportin gppl who are just blindly lacking in common sense.
    Fact is, whether i like it or not, Apple made the mp3 player i know and love. Hell, my home PC is windows, and I dispise microsoft...but this is easiest to use fo rmy whole family, so i make do( i do hope to get my own non-windows comp soon). It seems in your eyes, theres only 2 places to be, suport 'corporate nazis' or support companys tryign to rip them off. When infact, theres an inbetween too. Which is where i stand. I support the little companies that can make a stand against a company like Apple that isnt jsut down right stupid. LuxPro should knwo theyr'e gunan to get their asses sued..and rightly so. IF someone did what theyre doign to apple to them, they'd sue that company too. What we ne3ed, is for another small company to make somethign that doesnt resemble an iPod but is jsut purely better than.
    I admire LuxPro for one reason (anything beyond this they're just a pruely stupid non-common sense company) - they've proven that apple could have added all this functionality to the shuffle, and myabe apple will pull their finger out knowing this. Just Maybe.
    Bill Gates' products still do not work as they are supposed to. I get so angry thinking how rich he is when infact he can teven do his damn job properly anymore.
    I said this is i hate the way the world works, but i live with it. I would liek it to change in a fair manner...not by peopel screwing other peopel over...which is sxaclty what luxpro are doing to apple, and exactly what apple did for the domain...its stupid. But All we can do is suport the thigns we believe in, and not support the thigns we dont. I dont support luxpro for doign what they've done...i dont support apple for the domain...i'll not buy a song from itunes...i'll not buy the 'super shuffle'. But damn, i've bought an iPod and love it. If they screw me on that..i wont buy another one in a few years time. Simple as.
    Dan x
    p.s: i do apologise for my typing, my brain goes faster than my hands.

    17.3.2005 08:13 #18

  • venomX05

    Sure it was that....or were you drinking...LOL!

    This article is pretty messed up for alot of reasons, and I know I feel for the guy. To bad he couldn't get to keep the name.

    BTW, does anyone have any idea as to what he got the name for?

    17.3.2005 08:59 #19

  • Letukka

    "BTW, does anyone have any idea as to what he got the name for?"

    Does it matter? Even if he did it just the get some money, what difference does that make? None. He was there first and Apple just swinged him out of the domain by money. IF they saved some in the lawyer fees (which I doubt) what about all the negative publicity they get from this? A very, very stupid move from Apple.

    17.3.2005 22:55 #20

  • newtod

    Here's a post I'm sure I won't be popular for mentioning but...

    This guy registered itunes.co.uk 1 month before Apple registered a trademark.

    Now I guess Apple had itunes going for some time before they registered a trademark so maybe Mr Cohen got some wind of what apple were up to and got in there 1st. Surely Apple just provided doumented proof that itunes was in existance well before itunes.co.uk was pinched under their noses.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm very much against the 'Man' but something sounds fishy about this story....

    18.3.2005 00:07 #21

  • venomX05

    Quote:Does it matter? Even if he did it just the get some money, what difference does that make? None. The only reason I asked was because I was curious why he got it, no big deal. Chill out, it was nothing important.

    We all feel the same way about the story, so your not alone. It was just something that I thought if ANYONE knew, it would be kinda cool to know what he was going to to use it for.

    Thats all.

    18.3.2005 03:13 #22

  • A_Klingon

    Hmmmmmm.......

    And you mean, they didn't even offer him a coupon for a lousy half-dozen free iTunes? (Geeze.....) talk about cheeep. [Just joking]. I have not the slightest desire to 'own' a cancerous drm-stymied iTune anyway.

    I won't be buying an Apple iPod (any flavor) today or next year or ever.

    DELL has just come out with their own truly remarkable replacement (competitor) to the iPod. I saw a guy on the bus yesterday using it. It has a flat-out *terrific* screen display (not all squished), has softly-lit blue buttons, and looks about three times as sturdy as the iPod.

    Have you ever noticed how cheesy (cheap and flimsy) the iPods look on the various websites? Well, this DELL version looked just the opposite. "Substancial" is how I would describe it.

    I'd be scared to death to accidentally drop an iPod. *Poof*! $350 (Can.$) out the window.

    Based on the iPod's (apparent) flimsiness and Apple's Ebeneser-Scrooge-type kissoff of the gentleman who owned the domain name, I now add my personal boycott of Apple's iPod to my already-running boycott of HP ink-jets.

    18.3.2005 04:35 #23

  • Letukka

    No no venom, that last remark wasn't meant for you, it was meant for all these other idiots who think that justice has taken place in this news. NHF venom =)

    18.3.2005 05:01 #24

  • venomX05

    Oh ok...I gotcha :)

    NHF to you too Letukka

    18.3.2005 05:52 #25

  • venomX05

    Quote:I won't be buying an Apple iPod (any flavor) today or next year or ever.Same here...was going to, but not after reading this.
    Quote:I'd be scared to death to accidentally drop an iPod. *Poof*! $350 (Can.$) out the window.Yeah and you know the funny thing is....there are countless of other players out there, that are just as good. If not better.

    18.3.2005 05:56 #26

  • Mr_Taz_UK

    Apple shmapple....just give they guy his money FFS!

    18.3.2005 07:46 #27

  • ByteMstr

    Something fishy is going on, just a couple of examples from the last few weeks.

    - A guy called Romeo Maggi was to keep his domain Maggi.com with WIPO but a local court hands it over to Nestle;

    - A woman whose first name and her business name is Milka is ordered by a local french court to hand over Milka.fr to Kraft foods;

    and now this.

    EFF and WIPO should work together to ensure the proper legal environment for domain names:

    legitimate interest +
    not in bad faith

    equals: you keep the domain.

    Here big corporations are leaning on small town court judges to give them their way. Scr*w the little guy that has legitimate interest. Big Business = Big Bucks = Always comes out on top.

    18.3.2005 08:33 #28

  • drzayus01

    That is a slap in the face, it really is! I don't see how apple can just come and Debo a domain name that does not belong to them. Money or no money. Right is right and wrong is wrong.

    18.3.2005 09:41 #29

  • Mr_Taz_UK

    Thought you might like to see this:
    Quote:The logic that will no doubt be strenuously put forward by intellectual property lawyers is that if someone with a similar domain to a (subsequent) well-known service then uses the knock-on effect to benefit financially, then they are guilty of using that registration abusively, and the domain should be handed over.

    This is a dangerous logic however. If a company builds, say, a pedestrian shopping centre and subsequently causes the price of commercial properties in that area to rocket, that company is not entitled to take over those properties just because they have benefitted.    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/15/itunes_domain_case/

    18.3.2005 10:10 #30

  • Quadratic

    I don't understand the suing part. I think they should've attempted to at least buy out the domain. It would've been a lot cheaper...

    18.3.2005 13:22 #31

  • venomX05

    Very true Quad...but this is what they probably did, lord knows why they did this...
    Quote: I bet that Apple paid well over the $50K for lawyer fees.

    18.3.2005 19:16 #32

  • Mattrage

    I would absolutely agree about Apple's corporate greed, etc. But I also hate cyber-squatters, and that's what this guy was, plain and simple. I have no respect for cyber-squatters whatsoever, and it actually makes me happy when they aren't able to get a profit for hording domain names they had no intention of using.

    19.3.2005 04:03 #33

  • roninsig

    Boo Boo Apple greed is a powerful thing and absolute greed is thy name. What has happened to people? People are no longer what is important

    19.3.2005 16:08 #34

  • Motomatt

    It's rediculous.. He ownes the domain name and they still take it ? So fucking what if he sits on the name.. Thats his buisness what he does with what he bought. He did nothing more than what everyone else in the free world does with houses,cars,computers.. You buy and sell to make money.. This is the same deal as the Mikerowesoft.com domain. Microsoft sued the kid.. Gave him a few free classes to there IT school and 500 bucks for the name.. It's really sad.. As far as I am concerned crapple is right up there with the RIAA. It's sad what this world has come to. Really sad when companys just sue and take what isn't theirs because they have more money. Thats not justice.. Thats just plain stealing. You can't justify what Crapple did to this man any way you look at it.. Its just wrong..

    20.3.2005 19:57 #35

  • richieb69

    It is highly likely that this domain was registered with the intention of cybersquatting. This insidious practice was much debated a few years ago when people had been bulk registering company names (and individual names) prior to the company achieving an online presence. Then they would approach the company and offer the sale of the domain name. I would personally feel quite peeved if wishing to register my own name of www.Bartholomew-Blinkenthorpe.co.uk (name changed to protect the guilty) only to find some guy called Roger McDodge had preregistered it hoping that i would wish to pay him handsomely for it.
    Does anyone know if he was ever using the domain name actively as a website? What is there now is certainly not an active use of www.itunes.co.uk.
    Personally i wouldn't buy an ipod. They are quite expensive and i would be assured of dropping it down a loo or accidentally sitting on it requiring hospital assistance for removal! (long story, please don't ask ;) ). I'm quite happy with my 256MB MP3 player with crackly radio reception. At least that's made by a local company called HaiKai Electronics or something (well, local if you live in China or somewhere like it!).

    21.3.2005 00:05 #36

  • indienemo

    bow down or be crushed by the corperate muscle

    21.3.2005 04:51 #37

  • indienemo

    21.3.2005 04:51 #38

  • indienemo

    21.3.2005 04:51 #39

  • indienemo

    Sorry... browser error...

    NOTE TO MODS: PLEASE DELETE THOSE POSTS

    21.3.2005 04:52 #40

  • Motomatt

    It shouldn't matter what he does.. Sit on it.. play with it.. stick it up his ass.. He paid for it. It's his to do what he wants with it.. If the company wants it they are gonna have to pay his price. If they dont want to pay his price they dont have to.
    I see lots of car dealers squating on cars.. I dont get to sue them because I think the price is to high? Although it would be nice.. To bad my last name isn't porshe or something.. I could possibly have a chance at winning if I got the same judge! F U crapple...

    21.3.2005 05:59 #41

  • ddp

    do you know who owned the apple trademark 1st & it wasn't the co-founders of apple computers but the beatles. the apple founders had to get the ok from the beatles to use the name but on the condition of not selling music. whether that agreement has changed or not i don't know but do remember both parties were in court back in the late 80's to 90's about something

    21.3.2005 08:58 #42

  • Quadratic

    I don't see the point in suing someone for cyber-squatting anyway. It's just something people like to cry about because they didn't get to it first.

    22.3.2005 05:24 #43

  • venomX05

    Yeah! Someone needs to pass them a box of Kleenex!

    "WE ARE....VENOM!"


    2.6Ghz P4 Dell Inspiron 1150
    60Gig HDD
    512 DDR SDRam
    Windows XP Pro
    WD External HDD 80Gig
    Mad Dog External Floppy Drive
    Hitachi DVD/CD Writer
    External CD/DVD

    22.3.2005 05:38 #44

  • indienemo

    I think cybersquatting is a pain in the ass, but theres nothing you can do about it really.

    "Life is like a box of chocolates, whenever it comes to me all that is left is toffee logs" - Me.

    22.3.2005 06:39 #45

  • ByteMstr

    Cybersquatting isn't really an issue in this case:

    - he registered it years before Apple ever had the iTunes music service;
    - in fact, he registered the domain on 7th NOVEMBER 2000 whereas Apple were only had the trademark for "iTunes" published in the Trade Marks Journal on 6th DECEMBER 2000.

    Something really fishy is going on lately, obvious cases where people use their own last name lose their domain. Same thing here, it wasn't a trademark at the time so he should sue Apple for using his name and for reverse domain hijacking. If I was him, I'd contact the EFF.

    22.3.2005 09:10 #46

  • shineeyy

    spam edited by ddp

    22.8.2009 06:33 #47

© 2024 AfterDawn Oy

Hosted by
Powered by UpCloud