Lets talk

What you have in mind?

You sent no email notification for such ticket opening, so hard to expect that I check your client portal daily. Anyway here's, for public transparency, my official response consulted with my lawyer: Dear Mynymbox Abuse Team, Thank you for forwarding the complaint concerning **bitblik.app**, reference **FA2609002243234**. I take the allegations seriously and respectfully dispute the characterisation of the domain’s registration and use as abusive or undertaken in bad faith. Please record that the complaint is contested. The domain is used to promote an independent, open-source software project facilitating decentralised, peer-to-peer exchanges involving Bitcoin and BLIK payment codes. Its purpose is to support lawful, consensual and ethical transactions. It was not established to deceive users, impersonate Polski Standard Płatności S.A. (“PSP”), or exploit confusion concerning the BLIK trademark. The complaint overlooks the material distinction between the nature and function of PSP’s BLIK payment system and those of the BitBlik project. PSP operates an established payment system available through participating banks. BitBlik is an independent, decentralised, open-source protocol intended to facilitate peer-to-peer exchanges involving Bitcoin and BLIK payment codes. These perform distinct roles within a transaction. This distinction is central to assessing the alleged likelihood of confusion. The purpose of BitBlik is to enable participants to coordinate an exchange involving two different payment mechanisms. Referring to BLIK explains the payment method involved; it does not, in itself, represent that PSP created, operates or endorses the protocol. The complaint’s own description recognises the project’s Bitcoin functionality, yet infers that users would perceive an official cryptocurrency offering by PSP. That inference requires substantiation. I dispute that users would reasonably understand the project’s independent, decentralised and open-source character as identifying a banking product supplied by PSP. Equally, I dispute any intention to suggest PSP’s sponsorship or approval. The relevant assessment must consider the project’s actual presentation, documentation and functionality, rather than infer affiliation solely from the inclusion of “BLIK” in the domain name. I respect PSP’s trademark rights, but dispute the conclusion that those rights necessarily make this particular domain registration abusive. Under sections 1.2.6 and 8 of the URS Procedure, the complainant must establish all three required elements by clear and convincing evidence: confusing similarity to a qualifying mark, absence of legitimate rights or interests, and registration and use in bad faith. Even if confusing similarity were established, the remaining elements would still require proof. Sections 8.4–8.6 require rejection of URS relief where material factual issues or genuinely contestable questions of bad faith remain, without preventing other appropriate proceedings. See the [ICANN URS Procedure](https://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/procedure-21feb24-en.pdf). My position is that the domain serves a legitimate software-development and distribution purpose. The project’s open-source nature is relevant to that purpose, although it is not, by itself, a complete answer to a trademark claim. Similarly, the absence of a licence from PSP or a listing in Google Play or the App Store does not, by itself, demonstrate that the project lacks a legitimate purpose or that the domain was registered in bad faith. I specifically dispute the allegation that the domain was chosen or used to attract users for commercial gain through a false impression of affiliation with PSP. Awareness of the BLIK payment system is inherent in explaining software that involves that payment method; it does not, without further evidence, establish an intention to impersonate its operator or improperly exploit its reputation. The allegations concerning similar colours and website presentation also require consideration of the actual material and its context. I dispute the inference that the alleged similarities establish intentional impersonation or endorsement. These questions should be assessed on the evidence rather than treated as established by the complaint alone. Likewise, the references to redacted registration data and a change of registrar require examination of the relevant circumstances, dates and correspondence. Those facts alone do not establish an intention to evade contact. Please provide copies and dates of any earlier notices or contact attempts available to you so that this allegation can be addressed accurately. The substantive differences between PSP’s payment system and the BitBlik protocol support my position that the domain serves a legitimate purpose and was not registered or used to exploit mistaken beliefs about its origin. I submit that these circumstances raise contestable issues requiring examination of the evidence, rather than supporting the characterisation of this dispute as a clear-cut case of cybersquatting suitable for rapid suspension. In these circumstances, I respectfully request that Mynymbox: 1. Maintain the domain’s resolution and associated services pending the applicable process, subject to binding requirements or an independently established basis for action. 2. Forward the complete complaint package, including all exhibits, screenshots, formal notices and any determination already issued. 3. Confirm any response deadline communicated to you, the relevant FORUM case contact, and whether any restriction has already been applied. 4. Identify the specific contractual or legal basis for any proposed action outside the URS process. I recognise that a required URS lock is distinct from suspension: section 4.1 provides for restrictions on registration changes while the domain continues to resolve. I am not requesting that you disregard any binding procedural obligation. See the [ICANN URS Procedure, section 4.1](https://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/procedure-21feb24-en.pdf). I remain available to cooperate through the appropriate channels. This correspondence does not concede infringement or bad faith, and I reserve all rights and defences concerning the complaint. Please acknowledge receipt and confirm the domain’s current status.

"Actually something completely unstoppable..." gets it 💪🙌🙏👍🧡

Ahoj SK brothers 🇸🇰

Very cool. Do let us know when running 24/7

You mean that you would consider cashing out from whichever bank ATM the first taker accepts it? Would need to be in relative proximity of both ATMs. Is that a realistic situation? If so we should consider making it possible yeah

Who wants dark mode? 😁

Couldn't wish to be in better company. These are the true sovereign apps to exchange p2p. This is the way we win. 💪👍😍