Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act
- August 12, 2010
Under the UDRP the losing respondent has 10 days to commence an action in a court of law in a…
, - August 10, 2010
Of 19 UDRP proceedings commenced by SAP AG 5 were terminated and in 9 the Panels ordered the disputed domain…
, - July 28, 2010
UDRP complaints must be answered within 20 days [Rule (5a)] or by an extended date on proof of exceptional circumstances…
, - July 21, 2010
A successor in interest related to a predecessor who acquired the disputed domain name in good faith is not a…
, - July 20, 2010
There are clearly circumstances under which a trademark can be incorporated into a domain name without permission from the trademark…
, - July 13, 2010
There is no provision under the UDRP for an administrative appeal from an adverse order granting or denying the complaint.…
, , - June 23, 2010
Domain names identical or confusingly similar to trademarks are not for that reason infringing another's right. It is basic UDRP…
, - June 8, 2010
Nominative fair use and initial interest confusion are opposite propositions, but they have in common unauthorized use of a complainant’s…
, , - May 24, 2010
Parties should be reminded that the UDRP is not a trademark court even though it adjudicates rights to trademark infringing…
, - April 19, 2010
Domain names are not literally owned. Rather, they are held for a length of time pursuant to a registration agreement…
, - April 6, 2010
In at least one respect the UDRP is a friendlier forum for respondents than the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA).…
, - April 2, 2010
Paragraph 4(b) of the Policy comes into play when the respondent fails to marshal a defense for rights or legitimate…
,