Business Magazine

UDRP Panel Should Have Found Reverse Domain Name Hijacking In Case Of

Posted on the 24 February 2013 by Worldwide @thedomains

LD Products, Inc. lost its attempt to steal the domain name and lucked out without a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) when the domain holder didn’t respond to the complaint.

Although the Complainant says it was founded in 1999, it just filed for a trademark on the term “SIMPLYINK” on March 30, 2010, which was registered December 20, 2011.

The domain holder which “failed to submit a Response in this proceeding, registered the domain name on February 5, 2007.

The extremely short one person UDRP panel ruling should have went ahead and found Reverse Domain Name Hijacking even though the domain holder didn’t even bother to answer the silly complaint the panel could still have found RDNH.

“”The Complainant has not sufficiently established common law rights in the SIMPLYINK mark and merely makes assertions as to its rights in the mark without offering any adequate evidence to support those assertions.”"

“”Specifically, Complainant has not provided the Panel with evidence of common law rights in the SIMPLYINK mark prior to the registration of Respondent’s domain. “”

“”Accordingly, after review of the evidence offered by Complainant, the Panel concludes that the SIMPLYINK mark has not acquired secondary meaning sufficient to establish Complainant’s common law rights ”

“Since Complainant has failed to establish rights in the mark, the Panel need not analyze the other two elements of the Policy. ”


You Might Also Like :

Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog

These articles might interest you :