melitaweb

I think the scariest bit of this is the complainant's belief they had a case due to this skewed logic:
'whilst it is accepted that the domain name was registered prior to the date upon which the complainant began use of the ghd brand, the respondent primarily registered the domain name for the purposes of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring it to an entity to whom the domain name would be of relevance for a price in excess of its out of pocket costs....'

In other words. Domain speculation should not be allowed and, provided we trademark a company, we should be able to take any relevant domain for registration fee even if we didn't have the foresight to get in earlier. By the same token I think people should sell me land they are not using purely because I have a better use for it - also they should sell me it at the *same* price they paid for it no matter how many years later it is.

DRS 'experts' are nothing of the sort. This goes to show that you should *never* offer your domain to anyone - you don't know who they deal with. Scrap the DRS and let people go to court. At least judgements would be consistent.