Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
- February 19, 2011
An unregistered trademark is no less entitled to protection, 15 U.S.C. §1125 (Section 43 of the Lanham Act) if it…
, - February 17, 2011
Neither mere lack of success of the complaint nor presenting a weak case is sufficient in itself to constitute reverse…
, - February 15, 2011
When the respondent captures revenue from advertising links to companies that compete with the complainant and lacks rights or legitimate…
- February 12, 2011
In a case not otherwise remarkable, the Respondent in Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. Cyber Domain Services Pvt.Ltd., FA1012001365612 (Nat. Arb.…
, , - February 10, 2011
"It is for the Complainant to prove its case under the Policy, not for the Respondent to prove his defense,"…
, - February 8, 2011
Complainants sometimes have an inflated view of their international reputation: that it has penetrated to the far corners of the…
- February 5, 2011
The Uniform Domain Name Dispute ResoThe Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy is an arbitral process implemented in 1999 by…
, - 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…
, ,