Category Archive

Was the domain name registered in bad faith? Targeting vs. Constructive notice in the UDRP The Complainant relied on the two “App Science” US trademarks where the “app” element is disclaimed.  The Respondent argued among other things that: He registered the disputed Domain Name on November 15, 2018, for the purpose of starting a software consulting company in Texas; He …

Are Made-Up Word Registrations Defensible By Respondents? The issue of investing in ‘brandable’ domain names is a difficult one. As the Panel pointed out, “medaxis” is not a generic word or term, and “has the appearance of a trademark rather than that of a dictionary word or phrase”. Does that mean that it is “off limits” for a domain name …

Challenging UDRP Awards in an ACPA Action (Special Guest Article Series) CHALLENGING UDRP AWARDS IN AN ACPA ACTION: SOME PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS  It would be most unusual were there never any errors in deciding UDRP disputes. I’ll address these issues of error and “appeal” over several articles beginning here with some preliminary observations. Commentators have flagged a good number of errors …

 NEW: Introducing UDRP Perspectives! A new resource for panelists and practitioners prepared by UDRP Panelists and Practitioners, Igor Motsnyi and Zak Muscovitch who also serves as General Counsel to the ICA.  From the Introduction to UDRP Perspectives (located at www.UDRPPerspectives.org):  “UDRP Perspectives.org is where you can come to find a curated collection of up-to-date case law and commentaries on the …

Recording Now Available from the Inaugural Levine Lecture by Tony Willoughby:  We were honored to have Tony Willoughby deliver the inaugural Levine Lecture.  His insights and unique perspectives on the UDRP made for a compelling talk. We are pleased to announce that the lecture is now available online for you to watch at your convenience. Here is the link to the …

Panel: Complainant’s Representatives Likely Knew Case Bound to Fail To the Panel’s credit, the dismissal and finding of RDNH was of course entirely justified as a result of the domain name registration preceding the Complainant’s trademark rights by 16 years. But why did the Respondent have to deal with a case this meritless? Yes, meritless cases are part and parcel …

Retroactive Bad Faith is Unquestionably Long Dead It is somewhat surprising to see the discarded and discredited concept of ‘Retroactive Bad Faith’ try to come back from the dead as it did in this case. Retroactive Bad Faith in unquestionably contrary to the Policy as thoroughly discussed in this article: The Rise and Fall of the UDRP Theory of ‘Retroactive …

Panel: Four-letter .COMS May Be Inherently Valuable It is notable that the Panelist rightly recognized the inherent value of four-letter .com domain names. Time and time again, UDRP Panels have ruled in favor of respondents when it comes to domain names corresponding to three-letter domain names, including by domain name investors. As explained in SK Lubricants Americas v. Andrea Sabatini, …

Three-Letter .COM Registered in 1993, But No RDNH DNW .COM wrote about this case in its article. “GSF.com cybersquatting dispute should have been reverse domain name hijacking”. I understand the frustration expressed by DNW.com in criticizing the absence of an RDNH finding; “But despite this innocent domain owner having to hire a lawyer to defend against a baseless case, and …

How to Lose a UDRP Case By Steven M. Levy, Esq. After more than two decades, over one hundred thousand published decisions, and the numerous secondary sources that are available to guide parties, there are now many resources available to prevent the filing of deficient UDRP pleadings. Plus, brand owners only get one bite at using this expedited dispute resolution …