Category Archive

What are we even talking about anyway? by Mr. Sten Lillieström (LinkedIn)  When UDRP panels decide whether a domain name registration is likely to be an effect of cybersquatting, they rely on legacy trademark law terminology. At the same time, they do not have access to the full array of resources at the disposal of a court of law, should …

The Internet Commerce Association (ICA) is pleased to announce the release of the Initial Report of the WIPO-ICA UDRP Review Project Team, developed in collaboration with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The Initial Report is the result of a nearly year-long collaboration between WIPO and the ICA, co-led by Brian Beckham (WIPO) and Zak Muscovitch (ICA). It draws on …

Panel: Blatant Misuse of UDRP on the Part of the Complainant Complainants should always attach their trademark registrations, or at least official abstracts for at least one material trademark registration, especially if the date of registration is clearly material to their case, as it usually is. Apparently the Complainant, who was represented by counsel identified the Complainant’s trademarks in the …

The Internet Commerce Association invites you to join us on Wednesday, April 16 at 1 PM Eastern for a free, public Zoom webinar exploring the latest developments in the Domain Name Transfer Policy. Moderated by ICA General Counsel Zak Muscovitch, the panel will feature expert insights from Owen Smigelski (Namecheap), Roger Carney (GoDaddy), Jothan Frakes (PLISK .COM), and Theo Geurts (Realtime Register B.V.). Together, they’ll discuss recent changes, ongoing challenges, …

When Responding Matters Why is it important to file a response in a UDRP dispute? Sometimes the respondent’s rights / legitimate interest may be evident even in default cases, for instance based on the disputed domain name (e.g. a dictionary term), manner of use of the domain name, the website’s content, and/or respondent’s personal information (e.g. a surname corresponding to …

The ICA is hosting a free webinar this Wednesday: New gTLD Intelligence – Insights from the Experts, which will explore the current status of ICANN’s New gTLD Program and what’s on the horizon as the next round approaches. Whether you’re planning to apply, advising clients, or simply looking to stay informed, this session will offer valuable insights into the evolving gTLD …

Registrant May Retain Legitimate Interest Despite Trademark Abandonment A tour de force decision in all respects, which is made even more interesting considering who the Respondent is. On Identical/Confusing Similarity, the Panel noted in particular, that the mere incorporation of a company and a printout of a homepage are insufficient to establish common law rights (See also, UDRPPerspectives.org at 1.3). …

The Importance of Including Material Facts in a Decision The challenge for the reader of the LSAC .com decision is that not enough information is provided for the reader to understand why the Panel accepted the Complainant’s allegations and ordered the transfer of the disputed Domain Name from the Respondent. Perhaps the Panel had the benefit of compelling evidence and …

Finding Bad Faith Despite Lack of Evidence In this case, a Domain Name that predates the Complainant’s registered trademark rights dropped and then was registered by a third-party.  It apparently was never developed as it is currently on a default GoDaddy landing page.   While there may be more evidence of bad faith use in the case file available to the …

Neither Party Knew Who it Was Negotiating With In this thoroughly reasoned decision of <realsense .com>, the Panel made several important observations; 1) The parties did not negotiate directly. Rather, “the parties negotiated through an intermediary service so that neither the Respondents nor the Complainant seemingly knew with whom they were negotiating”… 2) Asking prices are just that – asking …