bangkockney

Just learn the lesson and settle your bill like a responsible adult.

Boring. Can't you be more original?

Land of smiles: Failed men, sloths

You very handsome man: A Daemon Voyeurs Hymn

City of angels: fiance got sly

Sorry I should have provided clearer instructions.

You could well forward the email to the owner of jobinthai and make then aware someone is potentially trying to run a scam on the back of their name.

3BB limits BitTorrent traffic, traffic shapes and throttles, which might be your problem.

PS a CV is not "very confidential personal data."

Whois:

Registrant:

Quality System (International)

63/134 Soi Aung Aium Bangna-trand Rd.

Bangna

Bangkok, Bangno 10260

TH

Registrar: Domain.com

Domain Name: JOBINTHAI.COM

Created on: 23-MAY-03

Expires on: 24-MAY-13

Last Updated on: 04-MAY-12

Administrative, Technical Contact:

Jirapatcharasin, Supachai [email protected]

Quality System (International)

63/134 Soi Aung Aium Bangna-trand Rd.

Bangna

Bangkok, Bangno 10260

TH

+66 9500 3028

+66 2753 5340

Domain servers in listed order:

NS16.APPSERVHOSTING.COM

NS16.APPSERVNETWORK.COM

End of Whois Information

Quality Systems International: http://www.qsi.co.th/

Blocked for me now on AIS. Was fine this morning.

http://www.google.co.th all good

Http://Google.co.th has issues.

http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/Google.co.th

Down for everyone.

I got that message using AIS mobile.

Access to this site has been temporarily denied. This is due to the site receiving high levels of concurrent traffic. Once the traffic reduces below the limit access will be restored. If you are the webmaster and are seeing this often you should consider upgrading at SecureSignup.net

You're example is still trademark infringement.

No it's not if the domain was purchased in good faith and is unrelated to the trademark owner.

For example:

ABC.com sell empty beer cans, and has a trademark on "ABC"

I buy AB-C.com and start an online dating website; without any knowledge about ABC.com trademarks etc..

No customers could get confused between the two companies as they are running totally different businesses. ABC.com would have to prove bad faith (such as me planning on selling my own empty beer cans, or me only using the site as a parked advertising placeholder to capitalize on ABC typos, etc..)

Well now you've qualified your example and changed the meaning of what you originally posted.

Not really. They're a jewellery company selling to celebrities. I bet they generate most business from word-of-mouth/personal referrals. No need for a web presence.

There's 101 reasons why a business doesn't want/need a web presence but would want to protect their trademark.

So they have no interest in buy their own register trademark .COM? Yet they pay lawyers to find the owner of the domain as soon as it is registered (before there is even a website there), and hunt them down?

Spending $1000s for lawyers, or spend $10 to just register the domain....makes sense to choose the lawyer route...

They probably don't have a trademark on the domain at all. They probably got trademark on "abc.com" and the OP registered "ab-c.com" and now they want to kick his butt.

But I guess we'll only know once we actually know the real domain in question.

To you and I your reasoning is sensible. But we're talking about a multi-billion dollar company. The cost is irrelevant to them.

They could well have their own legal department anyway, especially since they're large cap.

You're example is still trademark infringement.

A well known case is Dell.com and dellsucks.com (or something along those lines). Dell sucks was found to be a trademark infringement. As was dellcustomerservice.com and some others I can't remember now.

If the OP were to use the domain name in an unrelated market where there was no possibility of consumer confusion it could be allowed. By the OP must seek legal advice.

Personally the only thing I'd be saying to the lawyer in NY is thanks for your letter, my lawyer will contact you.

They have the trademark, presumably before the OP registered the domain. That's all that matters. Protecting themselves with a trademark negates any need to register all TLDs for that name.

The OP specified that it's a .com...obviously no one wants to register all the obscure TLDs...but they don't even register the .com...strange..?

Not really. They're a jewellery company selling to celebrities. I bet they generate most business from word-of-mouth/personal referrals. No need for a web presence.

There's 101 reasons why a business doesn't want/need a web presence but would want to protect their trademark.

If it is so important, why had they not registered it already?

They have the trademark, presumably before the OP registered the domain. That's all that matters. Protecting themselves with a trademark negates any need to register all TLDs for that name.

Hi guys,

The domain in question is a 5 letter dot com , i didn't realized it was a brand name . I bought it in good faith thought it could be the next google, yahoo or even apple. A brand that could make good use of it.

So i received alot of calls from a private number early morning in bangkok while having a nice sleep. So i only realized that this law firm from New York is trying to get hold of me. In the letter sent via USPS they required me or my representative to contact them.

When they told me that the domain name i own infringe trademark of their client i was shock , made a research and my they are a multi billion dollar jewelry company .

Well i didn't call them yet as it is weekend today in thailand, but will try and call them noon NY time. Lets see perhaps this might be my golden opportunity to earn some hard cash from this and just sell and let go the domain to them hahaha if at least they pay me Half a million UDS. lol

more updates soon

If you demand money for a trademarked domain you'll be in a whole world of trouble.

If you want any chance of keeping the domain put a good lawyer on retainer.

Whatever you do don't ignore the letters/calls. Then can take you to court without serving notice and if you don't appear at court, you lose by default.

i do not believe there is any law stopping you from owning the domain name.

actually i am sure there is no law.

no doubt they will first try to threaten, but then will start to make offers to buy.

Do not give up too easy or give in to threats, you can do that at any time, even half way through the court case.

All the balls are in your court, it actually gave me an idea to register some domain names, if the trademark was not smart enough to do it in the first place

Sorry but this is nonsense.

The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act means you will have to give up the domain name if it is trademarked.

Call the lawyer who wrote to you.

Thanks VP, will skim when I can.

At least they did one this time

OP, give your details to the JCWI. They are looking for people like you as we speak. There's a strong chance they'll launch a pro-brono joint action on behalf of a few plaintiffs who have strong cases, as a test case against the new rules............

As I am sure you know, bangkockney, but others may not; Article 8 is a qualified right. Paragraph 2 saying

There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

The government have already made it clear that in their opinion, and that of their lawyers one assumes, the proposed changes they are making to family migration, asylum etc. fall under this paragraph and they are prepared to defend this postion all the way up to the highest court necessary. (See Paras 27 to 69 of the statement of intent.)

So, good luck to JCWI and their guinea pigs. I wish them success, but I fear they wont get it.

Indeed 7by7. Which is why it's funny to hear Ms May bang the drum about wider EHR issues - saying the UK should have more choice in matters - when it already does!

If the OP is serious, and given the result of KA and others (reference to the minimum the Govt considers acceptable for a British family to live on) then a judicial review targeting the discriminatory element of having a higher requirement for a foreign spouse relationship could be the way to go.

But really OP needs legal advice and doing it alone I think is foolish. Simply, the OP doesn't have access to a small army of clerks and does not know due process.

Get a copy of avaast and schedule a boot time scan.

OP, give your details to the JCWI. They are looking for people like you as we speak. There's a strong chance they'll launch a pro-brono joint action on behalf of a few plaintiffs who have strong cases, as a test case against the new rules.

Regardless, they'd be best placed to help you and your case study could be included in a dossier presented to Government.

How I laugh at the current state of affairs whilst enjoying several beers and a Setanta Live stream

366ms

TOT 12 MB pathum thani (I can stream HD content on BBC iplayer)

Great website you linked to.

Really easy for people to get into. Wish Python was presented in this way when I learnt it!