Beehive.com, LLC a corporation formed in the State of Delaware, lost a UDRP brought against the domain holder Alliance Capital Management of New York.
The Disputed Domain Name <beehive.com> is registered with Melbourne IT Ltd (the “Registrar”) which is generally a brand protection company adding to being an unusual case.
The one member panel found that the complainant didn’t meet any of the three requirements for a UDRP.
The complainant’s trademark application as an intent-to-use application, didn’t give it trademark or other rights to the domain, the domain holder was using the name legitimately although quite lightly in the 12 years it owned it and that the domain holder did not engage in bad faith although indicated they would not sell the domain for less than $100K.
The panel took time to note that the parties seem to have an agreement way back in 2006 for the sale of the domain name for $80,000 but the transaction never concluded.
What is not explained in the decision is how or why the complaint registered their company name as Beehive.com LLC way back in 1991, when they never appeared to own the domain name Beehive.com
Here are the facts and findings by the panel:
“Complainant is a limited liability company formed in the State of Delaware, U.S. Complainant is solely an Internet social media business without a traditional store front or “brick and mortar” presence. As such, the foundation of Complainant’s business is based upon its ability to create a website presence that highlights its brand (BEEHIVE).”
“Complainant claims to be the owner of U.S. Federal Trademark Registration No. 85573362 for the word BEEHIVE (the “BEEHIVE Mark”) with three class designations all relating to online services. The Disputed Domain Name was created on September 24, 1991.”
“Respondent is a U.S. based corporation. Complainant’s Mr. Allan Gleisinger has had conversations with Respondent’s Sr. Vice President, Counsel and Corporate Secretary, Ms. Mona Bhalla in regards to purchasing the Disputed Domain Name.”"
“Ms. Bhalla said that Respondent would only sell the Disputed Domain Name for USD 100,000.”
“Respondent challenges the enforceability of the BEEHIVE Mark. Respondent alleges that the BEEHIVE Mark registration is an intent-to-use application which has not yet been approved by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. ”
“Complainant has not contested Respondent’s assertion.”
“Therefore, the Panel finds that U.S. Federal Trademark Registration No. 85573362 is not a proper basis for asserting enforceable trademark rights in this proceeding.…
