We didn’t see any news services or blogs out with this yet, so let us be the first to break the sad news: We were checking out the Goldmansex.com site just to see if it was still there, as we’ve done from time to time since Goldman Sachs filed suit, and much to our surprise, they note on the front of their site that they’ve lost their case against the company per a decision dated 8/31/06. They say their likely new name choice will be: Goldmensex.com (which already points to their site). HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! We hope they get away with it but wonder if Goldman will just go after them again. The note said:
Money rules: NAF decides in favour of Goldman Sachs
A NAF arbitration initiated by Goldman Sachs decided Goldmansex has to give up its domain name. The verdict is unexpected and completely out of line with the scope of a NAF arbitration. The fact is that this National Arbitration Forum completely ignored their own regulations: besides other burdens the complainant has to proof the respondent has no rights in the domain name. Goldmansex holds a trademark in this name and the services it provides….Many friendly lawyers already warned us for this: "A company like Goldman Sachs is so powerful they simply make the decision for the judge". Although Goldmansex is in a complete different line of business and it holds a trademark in the name, that does not matter. Money rules and the NAF does not care about their own regulations….
We now have to think about a new domain name, probably Goldmensex.com.
In the decision reached today by the National Arbitration Forum:
The Panel has found above that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <goldmansex.com> domain name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). The Complainant has alleged and the Panel so finds, that Respondent is intentionally attempting to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users searching for Complainant’s financial services thereby directing such inquiries to Respondent’s website filled with adult-oriented content. The Panel finds that Respondent is taking advantage of the confusing similarity between the <goldmansex.com> domain name and the GOLDMAN SACHS mark in order to profit from the goodwill associated with Complainant’s mark and that such conduct constitutes bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See Google Inc. v. Bassano, FA 232958 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 8, 2004) (holding that the respondent’s use of the <googlesex.info> domain name to intentionally attract Internet users to a pornographic website constituted bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv)); see also Youtv, Inc. v. Alemdar, FA 94243 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 25, 2000) (finding bad faith where the respondent attracted users to his website for commercial gain and linked his website to pornographic websites).
The full decision is below:
Tags: Goldman Sachs, GoldmanSex.com
No he’s not gonna suck her toes like her last financial adviser did: 
