Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
- March 22, 2011
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires a complainant to demonstrate that it has a trademark. If registered, the requirement is…
, - March 17, 2011
I briefly mentioned Quester Group, Inc. v. DI S.A., D2010-1950 (WIPO February 14, 2011) in my Tuesday March 15 Note…
, - March 15, 2011
Since the complainant has the burden of proof, any doubt that the respondent registered and is using the domain name…
- March 12, 2011
Inadvertent lapse renewing domain name registration has consequences that have to be understood by both the loser and finder. Some…
, - March 10, 2011
As a general rule, domain name registrations that precede trademark rights cannot have been in bad faith even though (and…
, , - March 8, 2011
In words or substance panelists have stated in thousands of decisions that the UDRP is not a trademark court. Its…
, - March 5, 2011
Trademark owners have an inherent right to protect their brand but not to a corresponding domain name in all instances…
, - March 3, 2011
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is silent on whether the right the complainant is seeking to vindicate must be registered,…
, , , , , , , - March 1, 2011
The disjunctive feature of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act makes it less tolerant than the UDRP of registrants of domain…
, , - February 26, 2011
Where a trademark preexists a domain name the registration may be suspicious but “a legitimate right or interest can certainly…
, - February 24, 2011
One can think of a record (the kind submitted in support of legal relief) as a combination of statements and…
, - February 22, 2011
The UDRP is a "conjunctive" regime, which means that a finding of abusive registration requires proof that the respondent both…
, ,