Here is our UDRP Roundup of the week.
There were some interesting decisions during the week, activity in the New gTLD space and a report that ICANN is going to propose to modify the UDRP Rules to give Respondents more time to file a reply if they ask for it.
Next week on Tuesday June 25th at 12:30 p.m. EST DomainSkate will be holding a free webinar that will go over how to use the DomainSkate UDRP Complaint software and answer questions about the system.
We will also be having our bi-weekly podcast on Thursday June 27th at 2:00 p.m. EST with our guest and topic to be announced shortly. We had a terrific discussion with CEO Jeff Campbell and CMO Jeff Sass of DotClub last week – if you are interested you can check out the transcript here.
June 19, 2013
“It’s quite common for UDRPs to be filed against short domain names that can be acronyms for various businesses and organizations. These UDRP frequently target three and four letter domain names, which are often times valuable domains.”
“Gucci SpA took another large stab at counterfeiters winning a UDRP for 33 domain names which used the GUCCI name/mark and resolved to websites that were selling counterfeit GUCCI products.”
June 20, 2013
“ICA has been informed by ICANN Staff that the Working Group (WG) on the Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings appears to have settled on a recommendation that domain name registrants who are Respondents in a UDRP proceeding be granted an automatic right to request and be granted a four day extension of the deadline for filing their response. This would be the first increase in UDRP response time since the Policy was established.”
By Konstantinos Zournas
June 21, 2013
“International Sugar Organization said that this letter does not prejudice any rights that the International Sugar Organization otherwise has in the “ISO” acronym but I am sure that is not exactly the case. They rolled over and the International Organization for Standardization will take advantage of this in the future.”
DomainSkate.com – by Deepti Sahrawat
“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 – namely that it took over 6 months for the panel to make a decision, one panelist refused to participate, there was a filing to disqualify a panelist for alleged prejudice, and the determination that complainant was not guilty of reverse domain hijacking even though it had barely used the YU mark and it has a significant alternative meaning/usage in the Chinese language.”