- May 25, 2010Silence with knowledge that a respondent has incorporated a trademark in its domain name can support legitimacy if the respondent…
- May 24, 2010Parties should be reminded that the UDRP is not a trademark court even though it adjudicates rights to trademark infringing…
- May 21, 2010As a general rule placing a disclaimer on the website is not effective to legitimize a disputed domain name, although…
- May 20, 2010Concurrent uses of lexical elements that also happen to be trademarks are not necessarily the result of abusive registration and…
- May 19, 2010Ordinarily, bad faith rests on a finding that the respondent is targeting the complainant, which implies (or at least an…
- May 18, 2010To violate paragraph 4(b)(ii) of the Policy the complainant has to prove that the respondent engaged in a “pattern of…
- May 17, 2010Abusive registration of a disputed domain name presupposes past and present acts by the respondent inimical to the complainant’s trademark…
- May 14, 2010When challenged for abusive registration respondents’ privacy veils are lifted for the duration of the UDRP proceedings and the WHOIS…
- May 13, 2010Bad faith under paragraph 4(b)(i) of the Policy requires proof that the respondent’s registration of the disputed domain name was…
- May 12, 2010There is no consensus on the standards of proof to be applied in reaching a finding of reverse domain name…
- May 11, 2010UDRP is not an all-purpose forum for resolving infringement claims. The Policy is limited to abusive registration of domain names.…
- May 10, 2010Paragraph 4(b)(iii) of the Policy has specific reference to the acts of a competitor. If for its “primary purpose” a…