Abusive registration
- June 11, 2010
Respondents have a heavy burden in proving rights or legitimate interests in domain names for purveying pornographic content identical or…
, - June 10, 2010
There can be two independent reasons for unawareness of a complainant or its trademark. One is the trademark’s lexical composition…
, - June 9, 2010
There is a struggle going on in the community of UDRP panelists. One group of panelists would expand the circumstances…
, - June 8, 2010
Nominative fair use and initial interest confusion are opposite propositions, but they have in common unauthorized use of a complainant’s…
, , - June 4, 2010
Parties controlling evidence must produce it to establish their contentions. Non production leads to the conclusion that the asserted proof…
, - June 3, 2010
No person is entitled to a monopoly over words that are common to all. Trademarks composed of generic terms or…
, - June 1, 2010
Registration of a domain name inadvertently allowed to lapse is more likely to be recaptured if the complainant has acted…
, - May 27, 2010
Fan clubs generally come into existence without express permission and sometimes over the (frequently delayed) objection of the honoree to…
, - May 25, 2010
Silence with knowledge that a respondent has incorporated a trademark in its domain name can support legitimacy if the respondent…
, - May 21, 2010
As a general rule placing a disclaimer on the website is not effective to legitimize a disputed domain name, although…
, - May 19, 2010
Ordinarily, bad faith rests on a finding that the respondent is targeting the complainant, which implies (or at least an…
, - May 13, 2010
Bad faith under paragraph 4(b)(i) of the Policy requires proof that the respondent’s registration of the disputed domain name was…
,