ukskunkworks.co.uk appeal

[Whois-Search]

Some 'interesting' quotes in this one:

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/18073_ukskunkworks_appeal.pdf

Whatever the finding of this Panel, dual usage of the term ‘skunk’ will persist. LMC’s original use of the name ‘skunk works’ was humorous, and a sense of humour may be appropriate to this situation. There may be some comfort for LMC in the fact that many people have as little wish to be associated with military aircraft as have LMC to be associated with illegal drug use. The risk of ‘contamination by association’ therefore seems low.

Submitted with the complaint are copies of 15 UDRP decisions, aspects of which are given in the table below (in the order in which they have been supplied to the Panel).

 

[rob]

I note http://webwhois.nic.uk/cgi-bin/whois.cgi?query=skunkworks.co.uk has been updated recently - indicating a move?

As for the decision - reading it through thinking of the Playboy Racing one does make me wonder if the DRS depends on which 'expert' you are assigned. Hopefully the review will sort this out

 

[Whois-Search]

There is also an appeal pending on DRS 04194 www.skunkworks-uk.co.uk which is another company:

http://www.nic.uk/disputes/drs/decisions/decisions4001/

[personal opinion]

Yes Claire Milne does a good job (see http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/766_itunes.pdf) then again shes not a trademark lawyer:

http://www.nic.uk/disputes/drs/experts/?contentId=1658

[/personal opinion]

 

[grandin]

Generic and likelyhood of confusion

Two important points:-

Experts looked for evidence that the term was generic

And

Considered the likelyhood of confusion

 

[Whois-Search]

This story seems to be making the news:

The Money Times, India
http://www.themoneytimes.com/articles/20070505/smoke_shop_bests_lockheed_martin-id-103472.html

Register, UK
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05/02/lockheed_martin_domain_case/

 

[Nikki]

Simple case, no harmful intention and honest use. The case should come out as it is. There is no confusion as the mark is not famous in UK. It is interesting as to why uk skunkworks not allege an abusive of proceeding by Lockheed Martin. It is quite obvious that LHM wants to use its trade mark power to reverse hijack the domain name.

The decision was in a news because of LHM. It's big and it holds a strong trade mark, that's it. At least, nominet has shown some difference from the WIPO's panel.

 

[grandin]

rights are two way

One must remember rights are a two way thing...

rights in a domain name are without any suffiix (if we are to believe the experts)

and

Acceptable confusion can occur if a later rights holder takes advatange of the prior domain name rights holder.... the unknown is to what degree this is allowed.....what is deemed unfair

and

mere registration does in fact gain goodwill (against popular belief) on registration is gets indexed and gains credibility with the most important marketing tools on this earth ie. search engines.....a holding page creates a saleable commodity.

Lee

 

[Whois-Search]

Bong man’s victory over US arms giant

http://www.bexleytimes.co.uk/conten...y=newsbxy&itemid=WeED10 May 2007 13:31:11:920

 

[retired_member17]

The shame

My professional opinion is that Nominet's experts are out of their depth and the DRS system is open to "professional" abuse by domain hijackers. And O boy is it being abused.

Good on you for the appeal, best of luck.

 

[Whois-Search]

My professional opinion is that Nominet's experts are out of their depth and the DRS system is open to "professional" abuse by domain hijackers. And O boy is it being abused.

Good on you for the appeal, best of luck.

I agree large corporations are using the DRS to try and reverse hijack names.

However IMO Claire Milne got it right in that case.

Also i'm not the bong man

 

[silvervirtual]

Lockheed Martin vs Novita Ltd : LM appeal thrown out!

Just a small note to let anyone interested, that Lockheed Martin has lost its appeal against UK company Novita Ltd for the control of www.skunkworks-uk.co.uk

Here is a link to the appeal ruling.

http://www.skunkworks.com.au/nominet1.htm