Feeds

Virgin boss victorious in .xxx Branson pickle

Cyber-squatter owns diddly-squat in domain ruling

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

Sir Richard Branson has wrestled a .xxx domain off a cybersquatter in a challenge over richardbranson.xxx.

The Virgin Group founder discovered last week that his Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy complaint with the World Intellectual Property Organisation was successful.

The WIPO panelist handling the case found that the cybersquatter, Australian Sean Truman, lacked rights to the address and had registered it in bad faith.

Truman, who bought the domain four days after the .xxx registry went live last December, said in his defence that he snapped up the address as a "souvenir". He also claimed that Branson had "ample opportunity to register the name if he believed that his rights may be under threat by another person", according to the decision.

But "you snooze, you lose" is not a defence to cybersquatting under the UDRP's rules, and the panelist found in favour of Branson. The domain will now be transferred to Virgin.

But because Virgin is not a porn company, and therefore does not qualify to register .xxx domains, richardbranson.xxx will likely be set as a "non-resolver", meaning it will not work when you type it in your browser address bars.

It is the second UDRP case to have been decided since .xxx first started selling domains last year. The first saw the domain heb.xxx transferred to a Texas-based grocery chain. Other disputed addresses include foxstudios.xxx and kayjewelers.xxx, according to UDRP records. There have been 13 cases filed since 29 December.

Uniquely, the .xxx space has a second way of resolving cybersquatting disputes that is much faster, more secretive, and turning out to be just as popular as the standard UDRP.

This Rapid Evaluation Service, which can take down an obviously cybersquatted domain in as little as two days, has been invoked 15 times so far, according to the National Arbitration Forum, which handles the cases. NAF has taken down 12 .xxx cybersquats since December, according to recently released statistics. Each case took on average two days for a preliminary decision.

Unlike UDRP, which transfers the domain to the aggrieved party, domains seized under the $1,300 RES are turned off permanently, so the winner does not have to pay annual recurring fees.

But RES decisions are not published, so it's not clear which domains were cybersquatted or what rationale the NAF panelists used to suspend the domains. ®

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

More from The Register

next story
Of COURSE Stephen Elop's to blame for Nokia woes, says author
'Google did have some unique propositions for Nokia'
FCC, Google cast eye over millimetre wireless
The smaller the wave, the bigger 5G's chances of success
It's even GRIMMER up North after MEGA SKY BROADBAND OUTAGE
By 'eck! Eccles cake production thrown into jeopardy
Mobile coverage on trains really is pants
You thought it was just *insert your provider here*, but now we have numbers
Don't mess with Texas ('cos it's getting Google Fiber and you're not)
A bit late, but company says 1Gbps Austin network almost ready to compete with AT&T
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.