In a pretty troubling one member UDRP WIPO decision a trademark holder of a turkey trademark first registered in 2000 was awarded the domain name Tupras.com which was registered in 1996.
The panel seemed to award the domain name based solely that the owner of the domain name Mehmet Kahveci, “has a long history of registering domain names that correspond to the name of well known Turkish companies”
While the panel acknowledged that the domain name was registered a very long time ago calling it:
“One remarkable feature of this case is that the Domain Name was registered as long ago as 1996.”
“The size of the Complainant is such that the Panel is persuaded that (at least in Turkey) the term “Tüpraş” is a well known one that is associated with the Complainant. The obvious inference is that the Domain Name was both registered and is being used with a view to take unfair advantage in some form of other (whether that be by way of sale or otherwise) of the reputation and goodwill developed by the Complainant in that term.”
“This was not only many years prior to these proceedings but several years before any of the registered trade marks relied upon by the Complainant were filed. Nevertheless, the Panel does not think that this matters. ”
“First, (although there are some panelists that disagree), most panels have not recognized that any doctrine or defense of laches apples under the Policy;
“Further, even if such a doctrine were allowed, it is highly questionable that it would apply on the particular facts of this case.
“Second, so far as the respective timing of the registrations of the Domain Name and the relevant registered trade marks are concerned, the fact that the Domain Name pre-dates the marks is not fatal in this particular case.
“It is sometimes argued that it must be fatal because it is not possible for the respondent to have been aware of the complainant’s marks at the time of registration of the Domain Name if at the time of registration of the domain name those marks did not yet exist. However, things are not quite that simple.
“Even though there appears to have been a four year gap between the registration of the Domain Name and the registration of the first trade mark that is relied upon by the Complainant in this case, the test is satisfied in this case.…
