Earlier this week the NAF issued a decision over the domain name www.aspenheights.com denying the complaint on the basis that there was no evidence of bad faith.
The National Arbitration Forum last week denied a complaint brought by the motorcycle parts/accessories company REVZILLA that had brought a complaint against its competitor POWERSPORTS LLC for their registration and use of the domain name www.partzilla.com. The case was decided solely on the "similarity" issue where the panel reasoned, very thoughtfully, that the REVZILLA name/mark was simply not close enough to PARTZILLA, and that the similarity of a common suffix was not enough in this case to carry the day.
The World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) recently denied a UDRP complaint over the domain name www.yu.com. The Complainant brought the action against the registrant (an individual in China) who had owned the domain since November 2006. The case is noteworthy mostly for the events surrounding it -
On May 1, 2013, a three-member Panel of the National Arbitration Forum (“NAF”) denied a UDRP claim brought on April 1, 2013 by Dr. Daniel Taheri of the LA Laser Center, P.C. (“Complainant”) against an entity listed as EMC2 (“Respondent”) over the domain name
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) issued a decision earlier today in a UDRP case regarding the domain name www.mycadillac.com that was brought by General Motors, LLC (GM) the owner of the CADILLAC trade and service marks, against the Respondent, an individual named Mr. Chad Clegg - who resides in Arizona.
The UDRP is focused on providing a remedy for those instances where a third party is squatting on a trademark holders' rights. To that end, it is not a remedy for all situations where parties have a dispute concerning the proper use of a domain name that is the subject of a contract or trademark license.
Even if a Respondent fails to file a response to a UDRP Complaint, a Complainant can count on losing a UDRP claim if they fail to provide basic evidentiary support.
There has been a lot of press around Walmart's upcoming 50th Anniversary. The company has put out a lot of press about the Anniversary, including a website at www.walmart50.com that talks about the history of Walmart, an Associate story book, timeline and other interesting aspects of the company.
Because UDRP decisions are based on the three static criteria (similarity, legitimate rights, and bad faith) most of the arguments that a rights holder will make in support of their position to transfer or cancel a domain name are common and often recycled throughout UDRP law
In a decision released by the National Arbitration Forum ("NAF") earlier today a UDRP panel denied the Complainant, Max Mara Fashion Group's, bid to transfer the domain www.persona.com. Max Mara owns the mark PERSONA for clothing (U.S. Trademark Reg. No. 1,207,303). Overall, the case is instructive on the issues of laches, claim preclusion and how generic terms may legitimately be used in association with certain types of advertising websites.
Although Lego Juris A/S ("Lego"), the makers of the very cool and fun lego construction pieces/toys (for the sake of full-disclosure I played with Lego's as a kid and love them) that are sold everywhere, have been pretty successful at stopping cybersquatters from using the LEGO mark, a few days ago they lost a UDRP decision for the domain www.legoego.com.
On September 3, 2012, a World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) Administrative Panel rendered a decision in a Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (“UDRP”) matter entitled Youi Pty Ltd. v. Xedoc Holding SA.
The Complainant in a UDRP action that sought to recover the domain names www.executiveresumepro.com, www.salesresumepro.com, and www.salesresumepro.net was denied transfer of the domains and found guilty of reverse domain name hijacking.
A frustrated UDRP Panel in Jessica and James Perkins - Mama May I, LLC v. Chris Phillips recently denied the Complainant Jessica Perkins' (Mama May I, LLC) request to transfer the domain mamamayi.com.
A UDRP panel in Target Brands, Inc. v. Quinv S.A. / Korchia Thibault recently denied Complainant, Target Brands Inc.'s ("Target") application to transfer the domain taget.com.