Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
- August 25, 2010
It is fundamental that a respondent’s intent at the time it registers a disputed domain name to take advantage of…
- August 24, 2010
The threshold requirement sets a low bar but small differences “can have a major effect on the way domain names…
, - August 23, 2010
The UDRP mandates that “[i]n all cases, the Panel shall ensure that the Parties are treated with equality and that…
- August 20, 2010
A certificate of registration satisfies the threshold requirement for maintaining a UDRP proceeding while a mere “intent to use” application…
, , , - August 19, 2010
The first five UDRP decisions (1 commenced in1999 and the first four of 2000) were decided in Complainants’ favor without…
, , - August 18, 2010
Celebrities whose names are source indicators have common law trademark rights, thus standing under the Policy to capture corresponding domain…
- August 17, 2010
In the curious case of Eneco BV v. Eneco, D2010-0548 (WIPO July 7, 2010) – curious because the Panel made…
, , - August 16, 2010
The complainant has the burden of proof on all elements of the Policy. It is lighter where the complainant has…
, - August 13, 2010
A respondent violates paragraph 4(b)(i) of the Policy if it is found to have registered the domain name “primarily for…
- August 12, 2010
Under the UDRP the losing respondent has 10 days to commence an action in a court of law in a…
, - August 11, 2010
“When a domain name is registered before a trademark right is established, the registration of the domain name was not…
, - August 10, 2010
Of 19 UDRP proceedings commenced by SAP AG 5 were terminated and in 9 the Panels ordered the disputed domain…
,