GoDaddy reviews : Should I sign up for GoDaddy?? Contacted by Attorney telling me to hand over my domain

Get GoDaddy web hosting for just $1.99. Click here to use coupon...

Special $7.49 .COM sales. Click here for this special deal...
I was contacted today by an attorney Aaron Mills Scott claiming to represent The Travelers Indemnity Company. He alleges my domain "" is a TM violation and that I need to hand over the domain right away. It seems to me that is trying to reverse hijack my domain. I am curious why they don't own the .com version if they have such a strong TM claim. Also, it is my understanding that it is a generic term used by many insurance companies and as such has an inherent fair-use application. My domain is getting great targeted traffic and I am not willing to just hand it over without a fight.

Any advice?..

Comments (95)

He has no grounds, I found two TM's that are dead.


Tell him to file a UDRP and pay a filing fee of about US$1500.

Tell him you are willing to sell it for $1499.99 LOL..

Comment #1

Had a Big Shot Loser Lawyer from a large corporation harass me ... they claimed that I had registered my domain name for bad faith! LOL.

The ahole pointed to the copyright text, and said the word between the copyright is a violation! I laughed out loud..

Comment #2

Are the two of you on drugs?.

Travelers is one of the largest insurance companies in the country.

The word "Travelers" is not a generic word for insurance, and they've been using it as a mark since 1865. While they had a previous US registration for "THE TRAVELERS" for several decades, dropping the "THE" is no great shakes, and they have scads of registrations for a family of "TRAVELERS" marks including:.



Registration Number 1611053.

Registration Date August 28, 1990..

Comment #3

I'm no expert, but what jberryhill said was my first laypersons instinct, too.

Travelers is a huge company with a loooooooooooong established presence in the US (had no idea it went all the way back to 1865 ).

While "Dodge" and "Trucks" or "State" and "Farm" may be generic terms in and of themselves, when you put them together, you have something that isn't generic any longer. I think people can be too skittish with TM domains sometimes, but when the domain is absolutely keyword pure (like, you own and addresses a TM'd business or product name, well, IMO you're playing with fire and personally, I don't touch those with a 10 foot pole.

Outright squatting is very 1990's and there has been much case law established since that time to make it not worth it...

Comment #4

Hmmn, interesting. My understanding is that travelers insurance is a type of insurance offered by all trip insurance companies. Also, I am curious why they don't own the .com if it is so clear cut...

Comment #5

More info on the .com: Domain Tools WHOIS results results.

Looks like current registrant has been using the term "visitors & travelers insurance" since 2001.

You are using the term as a parked site.

In the eyes of the TM holder, you're the lower lying fruit...

Comment #6

My advice is to transfer the domain. Travelers is an international brand well recognized in the insurance industry. They do exist at

There are gray area TM's, but imo this one is unwinnable ... especially with "insurance" contained in the domain name itself. That guarantees a clear, unambiguous association. One would actually have better luck defending (as a travel site)...

Comment #7

Because the .com owners are actually selling insurance for travelers and your whois would indicate you are trying to sell the name. They've probably been tracking the name and there is a reason the last owner (who was parking and probably received a similar letter) let drop...

Comment #8


My first instinct was 2 generic words.

Although because America have bastardised the English language it's hard to tell sometimes.

On checking though, because this firm, which I have never heard of before, seem to be big and just deal in insurance you're on a sticky wicket.

Wipo will never favour the small guy.

The one thing I see in your favour is because you only recently picked up and aren't showing any ads, and the words are generic you could plead a case you plan to develop.

This is the problem with tms. it's all very well defending tms. no prob with that. but some tm holders will just wade through and take everything stopping people developing generics.

Think of great sites that could be developed using the word 'live' to live, or when music is say, 'live'.

Well go to

They got the bloody lot.

Doen't seem right.

They don't own the English language.

Why couldn't you offer a compare site for travelers insurance?.

Answer: no reason at all.

I respect john berryhill's opinion and could be wise to take as he knows more than anyone in this area..

And although won't cost you$ if you defend yourself, you run risk of being labelled a sqautter.

So, your call.

One last thing, this maybe legal area, but be careful what you write. prob not good idea to ever write domain in full.

Also never underestimate how inept or aggressive lawyers can be.

I've defended domains before where after research the company had gone and took com, cctlds etc via wipo.

I defended a .info by email..

Incredulously the laywers, wipo etc. in past cases didn't even know (or admit) it was a geo region. twats.

Needless to say I bent them over and gave them a large portion.

Of course they offered no apology, and stayed pretty curt. but they rolled over.

Good luck whatever you do..

Comment #9

Listen to John and give up the $8 dollar name...

Comment #10

This is difficult one.

"Traveler's Insurance" matches their brand, which is a match of one of the largest insurance companies in the world. They currently have a market cap of $25B.

"Travelers Insurance" seems like it could be used as a more generic term.

However, the most generic term is "Travel Insurance" as you can tell by the Google Results.

Results 1 - 10 of about 20,200,000 for "travel insurance".

I could see a UDRP going either way since "Bad Faith" might not be a slam dunk. However, I can also see their side to the claim. In .MOBI I don't think it is worth the fight.


Comment #11

What are you people talking about, telling him to hand over the domain name!!! If anyone is going to hand over anything, it's going to be all other tlds registered and listed for SALE!.

No jberryhill, I'm not on drugs. I do my homework regarding this cheezy attempt by either a lawyer or someone who is playing a stupid prank on our friend. all the tlds are listed for sale and parked!.

The .org is listed for $1100 US, and everything else is PARKED.....

HELLO PEOPLE - the is owned by G1G company! If Travelers wants to take anyone to court, they should take the .com FIRST! Sorry jberryhill, you are wrong in this CASE. NOT GUILTY - The Court Favours our Friend! Keep the .mobi.

Keep the domain and tell the lawyer, if he's going to take you to court he better take all tlds to court! Since they dont own any of them!..

Comment #12

Playing the devil's advocate here... Maybe Traveler's is also sicking their attorneys on ALL the other domain owners at this point.

I'd verify the legitimacy of the attorney's relationship to Traveler's, then if you find he's legit, I'd suggest you: take a deep breath check the size of both your huevos and bank account decide whether you can afford to fight what would most likely be an expensive legal battle and then if you decide you can, contact an attorney that specializes in IP/Domains (mmmm, say someone like the esteemed Mr Berryhill or other similarly well educated and specialized barrister...)..

Comment #13

Link: Travelers Insurance | Auto Insurance | Car Insurance Quotes | Business | Homeowners.

^ I see their commercials on TV nearly every single day!.

You state that, "my domain is getting great targeted traffic and I am not willing to just hand it over without a fight" ... how much targeted traffic are you actually receiving for this "dot Mobey", and specifically when and WHY did you register this domain name?.

Finally, do as advised above;.


Comment #14

Jeff, I agree the domain is worth REG FEE... my point here is, this lawyer is either fake or one stupid lawyer - don't you agree, if their going after anyone, it should be the .com who is making millions!..

Comment #15

Righto, it's not even worth Reg. fee IMHO ... and, of course, we don't know how much, if any, the .COM is making, or do we know if they are going after them - so I'm just going by what has been presented here in this space IMHO..

Perhaps the O.P. can copy & paste the letter received ... from their attorney here for further review.

Just my two sense..


Comment #16

Sums it up perfectly No officer you can't arrest me for theft since you have not arrested all the other people who steal.

No officer you can't give me a speeding ticket until you give everyone else that is speeding a ticket first.

See how far that argument gets you.

The company is called "Travelers" they provide "insurance" (since the dawn of time). I think it's rather an easy decision...

Comment #17

Thats not my point! My point is, .com is the big player here to be taken to court!..

Comment #18

Maybe the lawyer did a sweep...

Is there any way to find out if the other TLD holders.

Have been sent letters too? Maybe they are dealing.

With the same issue!.

Primavera, maybe send them an email or something,.

I don't know what the protocol would be..

But just ask them if they received anything as you.

Want to see if it's legit.

What could it hurt?..

Comment #19

This wouldn't be the first domain they have gone after.

They are a very large company and have been around for more than 100 years.

It wouldn't surprise me at all, given the recent economic crash, and the financial backing of the Complainant, if every person who owns a domain with the word "travelers" in it, has received the same or similar cease and desist orders.

I realize it seems like a generic term, but unfortunately, it's not up to us to decide what determines a tradmark issue.

My suggestion:.

Before responding to any emails. Always make sure you are in fact, dealing with a legitimate person and not someone fronting and throwing around names to scare you into transferring the domain.

This happens quite a bit.

Research the names, research the email addresses.

You can be certain that they will continue to send the notices. You will be ABSOLUTELY certain they are who they say they are when a postal carrier shows up at your door with a certified letter.

That of course is when you know it's for real. Then you really have only two options.

1. Keep the $8.00 domain that probably wouldn't have generated any revenue.


2. Transfer the domain, save yourself the hassle, time and money that it would have cost you defending it.

I wish you luck.

Ps. If you need to find out what you're up against,do a search

Comment #20

So they only take REALLY BIG criminals to court all others get a pass?.

Forget about any other domain, this is about primavera getting a notice from a lawyer (who's bio shows that he is a bit familiar with internet/computer law) who's representing a company called travelers that sells insurance...

Comment #21

Considering is only Alexa ranked 6.5M, and is not even ranked, I can't see it getting enough "targeted traffic" to make much difference.


Comment #22

I did a google search for and the site was not listed on at least the first 6 pages of results (stopped looking after that.) Targeted traffic? Really? Do you think your visitors or the people who see your site link are looking for "Insurance for Traveling" or the great big multi-national company of that name that spends millions a year on advertising and has hundreds of thousands of clients?.

I would just let it go. Would love to see you win but you would be hard pressed...

Comment #23

I ran into a similar problem when I was new to domaining and bought a bunch of Nascar domains at auction.

For shi^$ have them fax you something w/ their letterhead and lawfirm. Doesn't take much to confirm.

If legit simply ask to be reimbursed for fees paid. God knows the class act has already billed this much to begin w/...

Comment #24

I will update thread when I have some new info. I have my reasons for not just handing over the domain. I appreciate input on both sides of the topic...

Comment #25

Just to inform.

There is this case with the company, where the company won: WIPO Domain Name Decision: D2007-0846..

Comment #26

That is the very case I referred to in my previous post...

Comment #27

I would hand the name over. This company has big pockets. You take the chance of losing and paying fines and penaltys on a name that is reg fee. Thats not a good gamble. And while the .com might be a bigger player why do folks keep mentioning it. Thats like when you tell your parents "whell Johnny does it".

Maybe they have an agreement withn them. That has nothing to do with this...

Comment #28

I have a better idea. He should transfer the domain name to you, so that you can then deal with the consequences of your own advice.

Your proposed response to the attorney is of no legal significance. You are ignorant of what, if any, communications there have been with domain registrants in other TLD's. You have absolutely no idea whether there are 1, 10, or 1000 other domain registrants who have received exactly the same correspondence. So if Traveler's files a court action naming them all as defendants, what is your brilliant answer at that point?..

Comment #29

Simple, Ill offer the domain for $500 US take it or leave it!..

Comment #30

24, what in the world makes you think that anyone else's issues have to do with the OPs? That sounds like very bad advice.

OP, logic would tell me to take the advice of Berryhill in a heartbeat over any other poster in this thread....good luck with your situation.....

Comment #31

This is not a case of bad advice, it's a case of ABUSE by the lawyer! In any case, OP should not hand over the domain name and in the worst case, drop it and let the LAWYERS fetch it in the dropped list!.

I had another lawyer attack me with the same lame excuse! they went after my .info domain name, meanwhile their was 9 other tlds regged! I told them, they can cover my expenses for transfer and charged them $500 US!.

Now any enduser/lawyer who refuses to close the deal for less then $1000 US is not smart!.

I still disagree with the lawyers claim Travelers Insurance two words is owned by them! BULL SHIT.

For all of you who claim Travelers has the right to this domain name, then Travelers needs to sue 900,000+ sites that use the word Travelers in their domain name!..

Comment #32

It does not matter what the rest of the world is doing, it does not concern this situation. period.

A domainer that owns trademark infringing domains are the ones who are not smart...

Comment #33

I would charge them $500-$1000 for transfer of ownership! PERIOD not for the domain name, but for my time to make the transfer! it worked for me and will work for OP! Post added at 02:27 PM Previous post was at 02:25 PM.

Their is NO TM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Their are 100+ TMS for Traveler and Travelers with other words! What are you people smoking?..

Comment #34

Before visiting, refer to post #6 by Berryhill...

Comment #35

I REJECT any ADVICE by jberryhill on this case!..

Comment #36

Enough to know my rights in this case!.

I will no longer comment on this case. My words have been expressed and we all have rights to our opinion. I wish the OP all the best!..

Comment #37

Now, who in their right mind would find that an acceptable answer to the question of 'What is your legal background'? Post added at 05:45 PM Previous post was at 05:37 PM OP, the fact that you have to state this at the top of your site speaks volumes...


Good luck with your situation, I hope you find it worth the possible turmoil in the end...

Comment #38

There is some bad advice in this thread. If you are going to fight for the domain on "generic" grounds that is one thing. If you are trying to get $500 - $1000 from a $25B company that is not a good idea.

A company that size would probably rather file a UDRP or lawsuit to set a precedent than cave in and pay a smaller amount of money.

I think asking them for money is the worst thing you could possibly do.


Comment #39

Disagreed 100%.

He started Zain Jeewanjee Insurance Agency in 1985.

Outmuscling Insurance Agents.

Sanjeev Jain.

Valley's Agent Zain Jeewanjee is an expert on selling travel health insurance over the Net. What's his magic formula?

Comment #40

I myself would stick with jberryhill as well in regards to advice. He has legal background in these matters.

As for 24HourDomainer, yes... maybe offering to sell the domain to the company isn't that bad of an idea. But that would be more for a small mom and pop business that is concerned about saving money. A company that makes billions of dollars could care less about money when it comes to making an example out of somebody. Maybe you have money to throw around for legal fees and such. But I know I sure don't which is why I would stay out of it.

Not yours. They would be willing to go out of their way and spend extra money just to PROVE A POINT that they were right and you were wrong.

This actually reminds me of a case I saw on "The People's Court" where the father sued the daughter or whatever not for money, but mainly for moral reasons. (to prove he was right).

As for the original poster, I think you have seen plenty of posts already in this thread to know what to do about this situation. Most of them agree that it's a good idea to step away from the domain, and some say that you should keep to your guns. But in the end, the ultimate decision is yours and I hope you make the right choice. Best of luck to you and your domain...

Comment #41

That is only a temporary heading until this is resolved to show I am not trying to confuse visitors and that I am not using it in bad faith. I will be meeting with a trademark attorney next week and will follow his advice. I'm not just going to hand over something because I was told to do so without doing a little DD first. This domain was registered because of the generic insurance keywords. Period! I was planning on using it down the line as a mobile directory for a network of insurance sites. Aside from that, I do not want to be the one who sets the precedent for loosing the name as it may make it easier for them to claim the other tlds.

I will post after meeting with the attorney...

Comment #42

It is good to hear that you are seeking legal advice on this matter from a personal lawyer and not just listening to the comments of other forum members here at namepros. The main reason people here are backing berryhill so much is because he has experience in dealing with such matters as these. I wish you luck with your domain. Be sure to keep us posted on what the outcome is...

Comment #43

I don't think anyone has clued him in yet, but this is probably the most sound advice your going to get. Not just because it's good advice, but from who it comes from. He's not just a random poster giving you his thoughts, hes a practicing Attorney well respected and experienced in Domain Circles. If I ran into a situation regarding a legal matter on a domain name, this is the guy I would call firt...

Comment #44

1.) The domain name is a lowly "dot Mobey"!.

2.) Who is your attorney, and why would you spend any money on this?.

3.) This is a PUBLIC thread!.

All the best,.


Comment #45

I agree with number 1. No offense but it's a reg fee .mobi , why waste any time on it and legal fees on a name you could drop and probally no one would reg. Its not worth it on principal...

Comment #46

If you haven't already done so, I recommend checking out the link in Dave's Sticky on the main legal page about domain laws.


10 US Laws Every Domainer Needs to Know..

Comment #47

I say challenge. Look @ Mr Scott's legal history. Is anyone going to challenge the Oppenheimer practice to Oppenheimer Funds?.

When I said fees I meant registration/time spent fees. OP...Was this notice sent from the registrar (Godaddy) in response to a complaint?.

It's one thing being a jackhole who is obviously trying to extort or register in "bad faith." At the same time it's another thing to form a rational opinion w/out seeing the notice.

Just because it appears that someone has some $'s and makes a challenge doesn't mean you lay down and give way...

Comment #48

Ummmm... run that idea past your attorney as long as you are there...

Comment #49

Betting that "any enduser/lawyer" matches any particular definition of "smart" can be quite risky...

Comment #50

One thing to think about: rather than pay $500 or 1K it's very possible that company wouldn't mind WIPOing the domain name just to make an example out of you. Actually it doesn't have to go the WIPO route. Instead they could sue and file for damages..

Then it's not just the domain that is at stake, but your assets...

Consider your options carefully...

Comment #51

Primavera... come on... It is a .mobi!.

Do I need to say more?.

How many visitors does this site get, since you are wasting your time and taking the risk to be listed as squatter in WIPO?.

I can't believe this domain name is getting THAT much visitors, to take the risk?.

This is only of value to the big company, nobody else and the only reason they are interested in it is because they HAVE to protect their trademark, orelse they will loose the trademark.

So it's not even if they want the domain name or not, they have to try to take it from you.

Please correct me if Im wrong, jberryhill?.

Seriously... it is a .mobi!..

Comment #52

Never and I repeat never tell a company that is accusing you of TM Infringment they can have the name only if they pay a amount to get there name back. thats called intent and has been used against people in domain lawsuits to show intent to profit off a trademark. yikes what bad advice you can get from a forum. Listen to the real lawyer jberryhill...

Comment #53

I realize you feel that way, 24HD. Travelers could be considered "hypocrites" for not suing the other sites, but who decides whom to sue or not for whatever reason?.

Also, having a trademark doesn't mean it's holder has an absolute, exclusive claim over any and all other uses of the word/s, although it kinda looks that way. It so happens what the OP's domain currently shows practically infringes their trademark.

Good for you that you got $500 from your own dispute. But if the OP tried what you said and got a negative result, what are you prepared to do?.

It's rather easy telling others what to do, considering only the OP will be directly affected by this...

Comment #54

I have not visited the domain name to see what the site is promoting... in my case.... my domain name was free of ads and a blank page! It was not a TM domain name, but the lawyer claimed it was in his world a violation of their rights... so I made a fair offer of $500 US and the deal was closed.

Now in regards of TM Domains, let me make one thing clear to all the newbs! The biggest and richest Domainers in this business made their millions from TM Domains.... MILLIONS! I don't approve this method and will never cross the line. Lately, Lawyers and End Users are taking their fight to smaller investors who have nothing to do with TM domains! Their is a New WAR we are fighting, called REVERSAL HIGHJACKING!..

Comment #55

Could you show me examples of this? I'm just curious.

BTW what was the .info that you charged 500 to the lawyer/co for?..

Comment #56

Right, it's a .mobi. Until this thread, I had almost forgotten about the .mobi extension.

I don't know what kind of traffic this domain was getting. I doubt it was even worth mentioning, but I'm sure it's receiving some now from this thread.

I see it's now parked. You should at least optimize it to make it appear as though it's a travel insurance site.

They don't own the term travel insurance...

Comment #57

I doubt you are going to get an answer to that, Dave...

Comment #58

Yeah, like any idiot is going to take a Reg Fee domain to court to spend $10000 in fees!..

Comment #59

"Reverse highjacking" is not what you call it when it's a TM infringement. And you know what? Just because you can't find a specific trademark that includes the second word, it doesn't mean there isn't an infringement.

It just so happens, for example, that Pepsi does NOT own a trademark for the phrase "Pepsi soda." However, do you honestly believe that if you owned you would not be very seriously infringing on their trademark?.

There's no difference here: "Travelers" is a big TM in the insurance industry, and "insurance" is their business. They would easily win a court battle over this. And it doesn't matter what they have done with the name in other extensions. It's certainly in their best interest to go after all of those as well to show that they've been making the effort to protect their TM, but as someone else suggested, maybe they are going after all of the other ones as well.

And really, if you don't listen to the advice of John Berryhill in this industry, I don't know what to say. There's no one better versed in the specifics of domain trademark law...

Comment #60

TM are you SERIOUS - 90000000000000000+ websites use TRAVELERS in their domain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! this is a case of ABUSE!.

As long as G1G owns - NONE OF YOU HAVE A CASE!..

Comment #61

FYI, where there's money AND an attorney, one can always "make a case" I think any attorney will confirm this.

Now, it may not necessarily be a good or strong case, but it is a case none the less and they just have to make the defense of your position more expensive than your financial (or time) situation allows.

Granted you could always try to represent/defend yourself in court and laymen have done successfully but will the overall "costs" (financial, emotional, time expended, etc) of your defense be worth what you are trying to hold on to?.

Just verify the attorney's relationship to Traveler's and if it's legit, let them have it (and if they compensate you for your reg fees be thankful for small blessings). If he's not legitimately connected, then you have a reason and legitimate grounds to fight it...

Comment #62

Well, folks like Leo Stoller and The Easy Group tried claiming any and all uses for the words stealth and easy. Check online and see where it landed them, especially Mr. Stoller, and I doubt the Travelers Indemnity Company are interested in seeing that happen to them also.

The thing is, Travelers has a responsibility to themselves to protect and enforce their trademark Travelers for insurance only. And it's solely up to them to decide whom to go after, especially if they see others using them in a way that's infringing their mark.

Maybe they'll go after G1G, maybe not. Who knows?.

Tell me something, though: if a mark holder sent you a C&D telling you to hand the domain over or else, some online forum user tells you to sell it to them, you do what s/he/it said, then mark holder eventually sent you notice for a filed legal suit and you're within their reach, will you want to go after that s/he/it who told you so for getting you in that so-called mess?.

(And yeah, I don't mind you not answering a question you don't have to answer, especially after your recent experience. Kudos to you if you'll shoulder responsibility yourself despite listening to others telling you what to do that later land you in trouble.).

As to whether any of us, especially Travelers, has a case or not, we don't fully know the situation between them and the OP. It's fine to entertain opinions, but they'll obviously mean nothing if it leads to a filed dispute and if...if...Travelers win.

Good for you if you're right. Tough luck if you're not...

Comment #63

Does anyone have anything to say about Mr Scott w/ the Oppenheimer law firm? Why wouldn't their firm also have a problem w/ Oppenheimer Funds?.

I'd like to hear this addressed as this is the alleged attorney initiating the complaint...

Comment #64

Why would there be a problem?.

For the same reason that Delta Airlines and Delta Faucets do not sue each other.

24D, get help. Your personal trauma is no reason to give other people bad advice...

Comment #65

Their is a bigger FISH TO DEAL WITH! Not just one, BUT DOZENZS.

I close my case!..

Comment #66

After reading through this thread I fel like I *should* be smoking something.

Seriously...I think I now know what it felt like for Alice to be looking though the looking glass. This is just surreal.

I didn't think it was possible to get on your soapbox whilst riding your high horse at the same time. Obviously I was wrong.

To the OP...take the advice of the person with the extensive legal experience...jberryhill.

Think I'd better go and drop some acid now.Maybe some people's opinions in this thread will make more sense then...

Comment #67

Yes, that's a pretty obvious and well used example (also for Delta Dental). Makes it a lot easier that all are in different industries and use another word after Delta. Clearly no confusion to consumers.

Oppenheimer law firm uses One of their practice areas is financial services. Oppenheimer & Company uses (I'm sure several others) and provides financial services. I don't know if OPCO and the law firm have any relationship (shared board members, etc).

Say they didn't. Couldn't there be a problem w/ the law firm's domain then? Not talking about the sue anyone for anything mentality.

I'm not directing this at you jberryhill. Just because someone is a lawyer doesn't mean squat. At the least they simply made it through school and passed a bar exam.

I've asked this only because this firm allegedly initiated the complaint...

Comment #68

Jberryhill has provided some useful information in regards to this thread. To the OP best of luck with whatever course of action you choose to take...

Comment #69

The law firm of Oppenheimer, Wolf, Donnelly itself dates back to 1886. They provide legal services, not financial services.

In a UDRP context, given that the firm itself is known as "Oppenheimer", they would have a fair shot at the "commonly known as" defense. Aside from that, on the legitimate interest question of whether they are making legitimate use of the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services, it appears they are using the domain name in connection with running a law firm. Perhaps it all might be an elaborate ruse, but it sure appears to be a law firm that's been around for more than a century.

In a litigation context, the question of bad faith registration here is something of a chuckle. More broadly relating the infringement, the likelihood of confusion analysis involves relevant market, channels of trade, sophistication of customers, and instances of actual confusion, among other things. I doubt that the respective customers of the law firm and the financial service provider confuse the two.

The question about the Oppenheimer firm's use of is something of a no-brainer, really.

On the whole issue of "does the attorney really represent Travelers" one might consider that the records of the many USPTO filings indicates that Travelers' trademark operation is located in Minneapolis. It is further illegal for an attorney to claim that he represents a client in such communication when he does not. The notion that a partner in an established firm such as Oppenheimer Wolf Donnelly is risking his livelihood to obtain this domain name for nefarious purpose is an extremely low probability event. Post added at 02:55 PM Previous post was at 02:47 PM I have pointed out some facts and things to talk about, but have not advised the OP on what to do or not to do.

Among other things, actual legal advice between an attorney and a client is confidential. Legal advice cannot be given on a public forum, and it would be instant malpractice for an attorney to do so. My comments have been primarily directed to the other commentary in the thread...

Comment #70

I know they're a law office w/ a specialty in financial services. And OPCO dates back to 1881.

To your last paragraph I didn't create that story. It is not known by me if it is in fact Mr Scott from the firm or someone else. Also, as I mentioned in my case w/ Nascar names won at auction my notice was served through the registrar.

Glad I could provide some humor. Maybe there will be more : )..

Comment #71

If shouting and using exclamation points a lot is your idea of a well-presented "case," I think it's clear why you're not a lawyer.....

Comment #72

At any rate, time will tell how this will turn out. To think it began as a seemingly innocent dictionary-words registration, only to become more complex than expected.

If anything, so-called newbies will learn something valuable here, especially pondering on thoughts between an online user with seemingly only one experience and a licensed legal expert (read: lawyer) with lots of real-world experience in this thing. I'll be darned if some tend to lean towards the former, but whatever.....

Comment #73

I would say that it is so low as to be preposterous. I think it is safe to assume that he is, in fact, representing the company he claims to be representing...

Comment #74

Agreed - this domain is not even worth the effort...

Comment #75

This is - bar none - the funniest damn item I've ever read on Namepros...

Comment #76

This thread has wasted more productivity time than it's value. If this was an appraisal thread the "regfee" responses would have stopped on page one.

When you have such a low value domain in dispute you roll and let it go. My lawyer very wisely told me to carefully choose my battles. This one just isn't worth it...

Comment #77

But how many use "travelers" AND "insurance" in that order together? Look it up and you'll find about a dozen total. Almost all are on hold, which probably means Travelers is doing a sweep of violators. Any TM holder can pick the fights they want in any order they want. Most would pick the easy ones first. There are probably lots with "apple" in them too, but if you put apple and computers together in a domain in that order, you are asking for a fight you probably won't win.

You don't likely know the whole situation with either. They may have have come to some legal agreement at one point which is still active, or be in litigation now, or have negotiated the right to use that name for that specific purpose. Maybe they just haven't pursued that one yet, but will in time.

Just because one person gets away with something, doesn't mean it's okay for everyone else to commit the same crime. Just try smoking dope sometime and tell the police or judge they can't do anything to you unless they get all the others out there doing it and getting away with it first.

If it were I could back the generic claim, but it's not. I'm pretty confident any traffic is expecting to find Travelers the company and not in generic sense of travel insurance...

Comment #78

Naw... This is the Best. Thread. Evah:

Namepros - Hunt For The Googlee Bear.

That thread should be a movie...

Comment #79

Below 3 examples.



I found another 10+..

Comment #80

Amen. The Travelers group will deal with them in their own good time, if ever. That's not for any of us to decide despite how we might feel about it...

Comment #81

And you think that helps the OP? The Cornerstone Agency Is A Travelers Insurance Company Community Partner.

Wait, wait, don't tell me. You think your local Toyota dealer is a trademark infringer because he has that big sign that say "Toyota" in his lot, yes? So you found something on the order of 13 domain names with the string "travelersinsurance" in them. Is that it?.

On a search across (com net org biz us info) using, I get 74. Many of them are not very old, and quite a of them are registered to Travelers. That's not a very big field...

Comment #82

I appreciate this friendliness. Looking forward to seeing how the OP decides to proceed.

John Berryhill - What does "a voting member of the ICANN Registars Constituency" mean?.

Thanks in advance...

Comment #83

It means that I am the designated representative of the registrar in the ICANN RC.

Iregistry is the 65th largest registrar by domain count, according to:

Now there's a thrill, eh?.

Every registrar is entitled to join the RC, which is one of the constituent groups of ICANN, and to designate a voting representative within the RC...

Comment #84

Like I said, lets see this lawyer go after the .com!..

Comment #85

How would you "see" that?.

Can the .com owner "see" that the lawyer is going after the .mobi? No. Not unless they are a Namepros member.

It's as important to be aware of what you don't know, as it is to be aware of what you do know...

Comment #86

Thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge with us..

Comment #87

As I have stated previously, I have my reasons for being cautious in handing over or not handing over the domain. Thanks to all the genius domainers offering free appraisals for the domain but this is not an appraisal thread! .mobi like any fringe ext is for speculators. But thanks to all for pointing out they are not worth anything, much like many have said about .tv and .us just because they haven't sold any. How many non .com hand regged domains have you naysayers recently regged that receives over 130 uniques in six days? Not world record crushing numbers but certainly worth more than reg fee to someone wanting the traffic. I digress, I will update thread when I have some real news. I think it's hilarious this thread is getting so much attention!..

Comment #88

Are you familiar with "the first rule of holes"?..

Comment #89

LOL for sure!.

I cannot believe the thread has gone on this long.

I wonder how much traffic the op is getting on the site now...

Comment #90

I'm thinking of closing this thread as it appears to drift away. Not to mention I'm not really sure what's left to discuss unless you finally post an update.

But...I'll leave it open for now...

Comment #91

Do it. Then open it once there is an outcome; unlike the thread in the Legal section. One of my favorites here.....

Comment #92

Actually i'm interessed in see what the domain owner will do and the result of it's actions...

Comment #93

As of this post, the domain name still seems to be with the OP. And a rather prominent disclaimer is shown at the top.

I guess the Travelers group let this one go? Oh well, all's well that ends well...

...unless I maybe spoke too soon.....

Comment #94

There is a company called Travelers and then there is the english word called traveler ( US English ) Read:traveler - definition of traveler by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Now, it would be a trademark infringement if it was Travelers Insurance and it would not be if it was Traveler's Insurance ( Insurance for Travelers)?.

I'm not a legal expert, but doesn't this mean he has an equal claim to it if he desires to put up a site on Traveler's Insurance? I agree the name is not worth the hassle, I wouldn't fight for it, but if the owner has his reasons, would anyone say he has a chance? In the end, the world doesn't work the way we think and he may end up losing to the big money, but I would say he had the right here...

Comment #95

This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.


Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |


(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.