[QUOUTE Nominet]
The Complainant can demonstrate that the Respondent is engaged in a pattern of registrations where the Respondent is the registrant of domain names (under .uk or otherwise) which correspond to well known names or trade marks in which the Respondent has no apparent rights, and the Domain Name is part of that pattern
[/QUOTE]
So you have to go to DRS to protect something like webservers or bounce or a three letter and spend money doing so, yet a frigging "expert" can tell just by looking at your names that you have a "pattern" of registering domains in which you have no apparent rights.
Under trademark law as a rule of thumb you are only infringing when your useage of a string of letters corresponds directly with the useage (43 categories) of the trademark registration.
Under passing off, as a rule of thumb you are infringing when you are pretending to be the company that is likely to be interpreted as the owner of the domain.
So, how can an "expert" prejudge that you have a "pattern" of registering domains just by looking at them and not for instance considering useage or passing off.
Or to conform to the pedantic wording - why does "apparent" rights come into it, it is subjective and I bet not enforceable in any other legal judgement process.
And why do domains other than .uk have any bearing on the issue.
Also, why is the pattern of registration of the complainant not taken into account.
or, more realistically, why should any of this past/irrelevant activity affect any current case.
Sorry, but it bugs me.
-aqls-
The Complainant can demonstrate that the Respondent is engaged in a pattern of registrations where the Respondent is the registrant of domain names (under .uk or otherwise) which correspond to well known names or trade marks in which the Respondent has no apparent rights, and the Domain Name is part of that pattern
[/QUOTE]
So you have to go to DRS to protect something like webservers or bounce or a three letter and spend money doing so, yet a frigging "expert" can tell just by looking at your names that you have a "pattern" of registering domains in which you have no apparent rights.
Under trademark law as a rule of thumb you are only infringing when your useage of a string of letters corresponds directly with the useage (43 categories) of the trademark registration.
Under passing off, as a rule of thumb you are infringing when you are pretending to be the company that is likely to be interpreted as the owner of the domain.
So, how can an "expert" prejudge that you have a "pattern" of registering domains just by looking at them and not for instance considering useage or passing off.
Or to conform to the pedantic wording - why does "apparent" rights come into it, it is subjective and I bet not enforceable in any other legal judgement process.
And why do domains other than .uk have any bearing on the issue.
Also, why is the pattern of registration of the complainant not taken into account.
or, more realistically, why should any of this past/irrelevant activity affect any current case.
Sorry, but it bugs me.
-aqls-
