Sections

Xbox One.com domain secured by Microsoft after legal dispute

Wednesday, 17th July 2013 09:19 GMT By Dave Cook

Microsoft’s legal team has successfully secured the XboxOne.com and XboxOne.net domains following a dispute.

Fusible reports that the domains were previously registered by a UK registrant, prompting Microsoft to lodge a complaint with the National Arbitration Forum in May.

Control of the domains has switched to Microsoft with the aid of The Richard Law Group, the same firm that represents the company whenever it has a legal dispute.

Here’s a grab of the updated record:

Meanwhile, Nintendo is still struggling to secure the WiiU.com domain after it failed to acquire it through the courts.

Thanks IGN.

Latest

20 Comments

  1. Hirmetrium

    Sorry Dave, can you expand a bit on this? I forget the original story.

    It sets a dangerous president when you can just come up with a product name then proceed to bump off a fansite.

    #1 1 year ago
  2. Dave Cook

    @1 That’s all Microsoft have relinquished so far it seems, and yeah I thought the same as you. It’s all a bit muddy.

    #2 1 year ago
  3. Tech-N9ne

    @1
    Dangerous president? (I guess you meant precedent) But really? The real dangerous precedent has already been set by fools who create domains based on popular brand then sit on it, doing nothing useful with the domain, hoping one day to cash on them from the company that owns the brand. Its not like this domain was a generic name or that it was registered before XBox brand came out.

    #3 1 year ago
  4. Samoan Spider

    @1 To be fair that’s a little naive. Its extremely common for this kind of cyber-squatting to occur and can sometimes cost the company lots of spondoolies to clear up either by paying off the squatter or lawyer fees. Not to mention that sometimes these domains are purchased for surreptitious means like tricking people into giving up details because they think the site is genuine. On the flipside, you often find companies horde websites defensively to stop this, but since MS would’ve been keeping the name secret, huge swathes of xboxone.com style purchases would’ve raised a red flag. Much like the xboxgold and xboxinfinity purchases did this year.

    #4 1 year ago
  5. MCTJim

    This really is a matter of trolls gobbling up domain names in hopes for a HUGE payout. I/we dont know the specifics if they paid out a huge amount or what not

    #5 1 year ago
  6. Hirmetrium

    @2: Fair enough Dave. Cheers all the same :)

    @3: Spelling, lol.

    @3&4: I say dangerous, because what if it was a legitimate site? what would happen then? When does a person become more than a cybersquatter with a domain name? And then what is the legal recourse? Is that not the point where Microsoft have to spend thousands funding the site in damages and funding the changes required to their brand? not to mention their brand recognition would be ruined.

    #6 1 year ago
  7. DarkElfa

    @5, So the hell what?! These “squatters” are no more than long term investors hoping for a payoff on their investment from these billion dollar firms.

    If their claim is legal, then the firms should have to negotiate a deal and pay out. In the end it’s their fault for not having the good sense to think ahead.

    Either way, these firms should not have the right to legally take away these sites from their legitimate and legal owners without reimbursement.

    The term cyber squatting was one thought up and reinforced by big tech firms to paint these investors in a bad light and turn the public against them while insuring these investors never try to make money off of them. After all, how dare anybody but big business make money. :/

    #7 1 year ago
  8. MCTJim

    @7: “I/we dont know the specifics if they paid out a huge amount or what not.”

    So you think they should pay out 100k for a domain name? or just what its worth? $10 bucks?

    Do you know they just took it? No? Do we know they negotiated a deal? No.

    You assumed they just sucked it up by brute force..

    #8 1 year ago
  9. MrWaffles

    Any domainer holding copyrighter words is playing a game, some companies pay in cash to release the domain instead of spending thousands on lawyers.

    But, since big brand already have a huge legal department, the cost is negligible.

    As for the domainer, I hope he at least got something!

    #9 1 year ago
  10. Samoan Spider

    @7 Calling them ‘investors’ is fair, much like the people who break into someone’s house while their on holiday and claim that they have a right to domicile are just ‘lodgers’. Except in most cases, they don’t use the name for a sensible reason, they just hang onto it until someone needs it and pays/fucks them off. I agree that there’s nothing wrong with people making money, but this is a time when we have people using troubling means of doing so, like patent assertion entities and so forth. Cyber-squatting is just another method of extortion. After all, if they had a fair claim to a websites name, they wouldn’t have relented or lost in court.

    #10 1 year ago
  11. hitnrun

    While the practice of law in reality is indistinguishable from high-seas piracy except that it’s, well, legal, I would think the principled/ethical question should rest on whether the man had the name “xboxone.com” before or after the product’s name was known.

    If he registered it before, then Microsoft should have no right to take it. If he registered it, as is likely, after Microsoft announced it…well, I think a company with a $239 billion market cap should still be punished for their stupidity in not registering it first, but as a matter of legal principle they should be allowed to claim it as it is their IP and trademark.

    #11 1 year ago
  12. bradk825

    Same idea as a patent troll. Patent an idea with no intention of every using it, then when somebody does it, you can sue them because you own the patent, and they have to pay out. One of the notable ones to have happened was the “buy it now” feature on ebay. I can’t remember how that case ended, but they were sued by a patent troll.

    #12 1 year ago
  13. Samoan Spider

    @12 They got kicked into touch for that suit, prior art and all that. Same with the Newegg shopping basket affair and thankfully many others. Unfortunately the “scan and email” patent suit is still doing the rounds but I think the scanner manufacturers are getting around to sorting it:

    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/meet-the-nice-guy-lawyers-who-want-1000-per-worker-for-using-scanners/

    #13 1 year ago
  14. ChunkyLover112

    What was that moron using the domain name for anyway? I visited it a while ago and it had no content.

    #14 1 year ago
  15. MCTJim

    @14 parking it looking to make a buck. I am sure MS got the site after it paid for it..be it market value or more…we will never know unless the guy who had it speaks.

    Hell I cant even get my own lastname.com cause the trolls snatched it up hoping to make a buck on it and my last name is not even close to a common name.

    #15 1 year ago
  16. fearmonkey

    The person that owned the site registered way before Xbox One was even a thought in anyones mind, he wasn’t a squatter. It was a fansite at one time and he kept the name.

    It’s financial bullying is what it is, the guy probably didnt want to fight a long protracted legal battle and gave in. I’d like to know if he was compensated in any way, if he wasnt, them its another reason to dislike MS and their teams of lawyers.

    #16 1 year ago
  17. DarkElfa

    You guys keep comparing it to theft. These guys didn’t break in and steal something, they bought a domain name ahead of someone else in the hopes that who wanted it would pay big to get it.

    As far as I know, that’s called fucking business. Using the legal system to claim extortion is a damn joke. If that’s extortion, then consumers are getting extorted by companies like Microsoft every day.

    Oh, you want to play your game online? Pay up fuckers, BAM, extortion! Oh, you don’t have to play online so it’s not extortion? They don’t have to have that domain name either, they simply felt they were entitled to it and used the law to take it from the holder without having to pay for it.

    Pretty sure that’s theft.

    #17 1 year ago
  18. MCTJim

    @17 we will never know the terms that came about. He could have made out real big for all we know.

    #18 1 year ago
  19. bradk825

    @17 however you feel about MS taking them to court over the name instead of offering them oodles of money, this much is for certain: Buying a domain name in the hopes a company will want it so you can scam money out of them is not an honest way of doing business. You didn’t earn the money through hard work or creativity, you went the sleazy route.

    I don’t know if that’s the specific case here, just commenting on the practice overall. Looking for ways to force someone to pay you for doing absolutely nothing is shady business.

    #19 1 year ago
  20. DarkElfa

    @19, You may not like it but how is it scamming? Half of all the business done in this world is done the “sleazy” way. Doing the least possible for the greatest return is smart business man.

    However, I will also say that this only depends on if they’re selling for a reasonable price. If they’re asking millions, then that is garbage.

    #20 1 year ago

Comments are now closed on this article.