UDRP (Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy) was established and adopted at ICANN’s inception as a dispute resolution policy to resolve disputes between trademark holders and domain owners more quickly and cost-effectively than judicial litigation.
Panel: Complainant Misconstrues the Passive Holding Doctrine – vol 5.7
February 18, 2025
UDRP Perspectives has been updated with new perspectives on the topics of Trademark Infringement and Reputation, written by Igor Motsnyi and Zak Muscovitch. UDRP Perspectives welcomes you to review current jurisprudence as it relates to these two important topics or on any of the 50 topics that it covers. The goal of UDRP Perspectives is to provide guidance in the application of the UDRP through up-to-date case
A Tale of Two Enrons – vol. 5.6
February 11, 2025
Two-Letter Domain Names, the Big Game, and the UDRP, by John Berryhill As a greater Philadelphia area practitioner, it is worth mentioning that the US held its football championship yesterday (real football, not soccer or that weird thing they do in Australia). The cost of television advertising during this game averages something like US $8 million for a 30-second spot. One
Dealing With One Dispute and Two Respondents – vol 5.5
February 4, 2025
Please join the CIIDRC for an informative and free session, open to all via Zoom on February 26, 2025. Sign up here! Complimentary Webinar Register Here! UDRP Perspectives has been updated with new perspectives on the topics of Trademark Infringement and Reputation, written by Igor Motsnyi and Zak Muscovitch. UDRP Perspectives welcomes you to review current jurisprudence as it relates to these two important topics or on
Reputation is Everything – vol. 5.4
January 28, 2025
UDRP Perspectives has been updated with new perspectives on the topics of Trademark Infringement and Reputation, written by Igor Motsnyi and Zak Muscovitch. UDRP Perspectives welcomes you to review current jurisprudence as it relates to these two important topics or on any of the 50 topics that it covers. The goal of UDRP Perspectives is to provide guidance in the application of the UDRP through up-to-date case
Issues Sound in Trademark Infringement But Are Beyond Scope of Policy – vol 5.3
January 21, 2025
UDRP Perspectives has been updated with new perspectives on the topics of Trademark Infringement and Reputation, written by Igor Motsnyi and Zak Muscovitch. UDRP Perspectives welcomes you to review current jurisprudence as it relates to these two important topics or on any of the 50 topics that it covers. The goal of UDRP Perspectives is to provide guidance in the
Who Solicited Who? – vol. 5.2
January 14, 2025
Who Solicited Who? As readers will know, different jurisdictions have different procedures for trademark registrations. As the Panel observed in this particular case, the Complainant’s French trademark was registered on October 14, 2011, but was made effective from March 30, 2011, i.e. the date of application, as is apparently the French practice. Usually, a registration with such retroactive effect wouldn’t
No Place for Constructive Notice in UDRP – vol. 5.1
January 7, 2025
No Place for Constructive Notice in UDRP Once again, a Complainant has erroneously relied on “constructive notice”. The Panel properly dismissed this allegation, in part relying upon Gerald Levine’s treatise (“Clash”). As noted in UDRP Perspectives at 3.4, there is no place for the concept of “constructive knowledge” of trademarks under the Policy. In The Way International Inc. v. Diamond
First Domain Registered Before Complainant Rights, Second One After – vol. 4.52
December 31, 2024
First Domain Registered Before Complainant Rights, Second One After The Panel correctly determined that a domain name simply cannot have been registered in bad faith when the registration predates a trademark right, as noted in UDRP Perspectives at 3.2. It is axiomatic that a Respondent could not have registered a domain name in bad faith before a Complainant acquired rights in the
Trademark Infringement and the UDRP – vol. 4.50
December 17, 2024
Trademark Infringement and the UDRP Notably, the Panel properly rejected the doctrine of “constructive notice” in the context of the UDRP. As noted in UDRP Perspectives at 3.4, there is no place for the concept of “constructive notice” of trademarks under the Policy. The essence of a Complaint is an allegation of bad faith targeting of the Complainant. For that
Panel: Complainant’s Certification “Could Not Properly Have Been Given” – vol. 4.49
December 10, 2024
Panel: Complainant’s Certification “Could Not Properly Have Been Given” “First come, first served” is a particularly compelling and clear general principle that one learns in childhood, but it is equally applicable to UDRP disputes as the Panel found in this case. The Panel noted that the Respondent had registered the .com Domain Name back in 2009 – six years prior