Abusive registration
- February 10, 2011
"It is for the Complainant to prove its case under the Policy, not for the Respondent to prove his defense,"…
, - February 3, 2011
A holder's right accrues when it acquires its trademark. It is a going forward right; not one that reaches back,…
, - February 1, 2011
The key concept of the Policy is exploitative intent directed to a holder's trademark. If the respondent has registered and…
, - January 29, 2011
Paragraph 4(b)(iii) of the Policy reads: “[Y]ou have registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business…
, - January 27, 2011
In determining whether a respondent has violated the UDRP the examination focuses on the domain name and the trademark not…
, - January 25, 2011
The extension ".co" (country code for Columbia) is perfectly respectable although confusing with ".com" where the second level domain is…
, , - January 19, 2011
The UDRP offers a forum with limited jurisdiction to resolve a particular type of dispute in which a domain name…
, , - January 15, 2011
First generation registrants are favored under the UDRP even if use changes to bad faith while transferees are answerable for…
, - January 13, 2011
Potential, inadvertent and artless misspelling of trademarks by Internet users while typing in the domain name was quickly exploited by…
, - January 6, 2011
Competition for domain names productive for non-trademark business and those corresponding to trademarks is intense. Dictionary words alone or combined…
, , - January 4, 2011
Refiling a complaint against the same respondent for the same domain name is not permitted as "of right." It was…
, - December 28, 2010
There are two classes of respondents whose registrations have been found to be immune from presumptive bad faith use even…
,