Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
- August 9, 2010
The Panel in Facebook, Inc. v. Amjad Abbas, DME2010-0005 (WIPO July 13, 2010) addresses an issue of first impression, namely…
- August 6, 2010
We associate opportunism with respondents, but it equally describes a class of complainants who overreach their trademark rights in an…
- August 5, 2010
Complainant has the initial burden of proof while respondent has the burden of persuasion on the right or legitimate interest…
, - August 4, 2010
I noted yesterday that secondary meaning is earned not presumed. Panels determine first whether there is jurisdiction. If there is,…
, - August 3, 2010
In common law jurisdictions an unregistered trademark is no less protected than one registered. But, the burden of proof is…
, - August 2, 2010
The greater the geographic distance between parties the more plausible the respondent’s denial that at the time it registered the…
, , - July 30, 2010
Conceivably, a respondent on one continent could register a domain name confusingly similar to a trademark actively used on another…
, - July 29, 2010
Predators and Parasites come in a variety of shapes and sizes as are abundantly illustrated in these ongoing Notes. Some…
- July 28, 2010
UDRP complaints must be answered within 20 days [Rule (5a)] or by an extended date on proof of exceptional circumstances…
, - July 27, 2010
In Benchmark Brands, Inc. v. Sky Blue Marketing, FA1006001331227 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 23, 2010) the Respondent admitted that there…
- July 26, 2010
Employees, vendors and agents perform services and act on instructions of employers and principals. That a respondent in one of…
- July 23, 2010
It is seen as a deficiency by some that a complainant is remediless under the UDRP for blatant bad faith…
,