Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

texidriver · 11-07-2006, 06:53:39 PM

Is this "Reverse Domain Name Hijacking" or am I not an expert?

http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/deci...2006-0655.html

tifosi · 11-07-2006, 07:15:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by texidriver

Is this "Reverse Domain Name Hijacking" or am I not an expert?

http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/deci...2006-0655.html

Yes.

The complainant used the drs procedure in bad faith in an attempt to deprive the respondant of a domain name that it had legitimate clains to.

S

diablo · 11-07-2006, 09:48:22 PM

not according to the findings it wasn't:

D. Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

Paragraph 15(e) of the Rules provides that the Panel may make a finding that the Complaint is brought in bad faith in circumstances characterized as reverse domain name hijacking. Although arguable, the Panel declines to find that the Complainant used the Policy in bad faith to attempt to deprive the Respondent from using his domain name. The Panel is satisfied that the Complainant was attempting to assert its trademark rights, without bad faith, as it is entitled to do.

tifosi · 11-07-2006, 10:18:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diablo

not according to the findings it wasn't:

D. Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

Paragraph 15(e) of the Rules provides that the Panel may make a finding that the Complaint is brought in bad faith in circumstances characterized as reverse domain name hijacking. Although arguable, the Panel declines to find that the Complainant used the Policy in bad faith to attempt to deprive the Respondent from using his domain name. The Panel is satisfied that the Complainant was attempting to assert its trademark rights, without bad faith, as it is entitled to do.

as the saying goes: one mans expert...

asserting trademark rights is a bit loose in this case I think. My opinion it was a blatant attempt to wrest the domain off its legitimate owner. Naivity is no excuse. The company IP lawyers would have known the score.

S

S

11-07-2006, 06:53:39 PM	#1 (permalink)
texidriver Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Beckofbeyond Posts: 491 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 1)	Reverse Domain Name Hijacking Is this "Reverse Domain Name Hijacking" or am I not an expert? http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/deci...2006-0655.html

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Domain Name Community	Replies	Last Post
Morgan Stanley Vs Meow (Felix domesticus)	retired member 1	Domain Name Disputes	5	03-05-2007 07:55:14 PM
Bounce.co.uk appeal decision	michaeltoth	Domain Name Disputes	65	22-07-2006 04:14:14 AM
Detagged Domain Names FAQ	admin	Detagged or Suspended UK Domain Names	0	04-11-2005 09:01:37 PM
UK Domain Name Glossary	admin	Introductions	0	25-03-2005 06:31:19 PM

11-07-2006, 09:48:22 PM	#3 (permalink)
diablo Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Bonnie Scotland Posts: 738 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 37)	not according to the findings it wasn't: D. Reverse Domain Name Hijacking Paragraph 15(e) of the Rules provides that the Panel may make a finding that the Complaint is brought in bad faith in circumstances characterized as reverse domain name hijacking. Although arguable, the Panel declines to find that the Complainant used the Policy in bad faith to attempt to deprive the Respondent from using his domain name. The Panel is satisfied that the Complainant was attempting to assert its trademark rights, without bad faith, as it is entitled to do.