Forum Moderators: buckworks & webwork

Message Too Old, No Replies

Who Knew?

WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition

         

Webwork

4:47 pm on May 12, 2022 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



<run on sentence> Sometimes, whilst attempting to live a "good life" (TM...cough) we humans "stumble upon" (TM...cough) something that may "open your eyes" (TM...cough) a bit wider . . and . . well . . enough "Blah! Blah! Blah!" . . (TM...cough...gag...gurgle...wimper...#FML...die, yes - Blah! Blah! Blah! is subject to a registered trademark) . . . who knew . . that a) every phrase I just mentioned is subject to a USPTO trademark; and, b) WIPO WIPO has an extensive online document outlining issues and related critical analyses meant to assist WIPO arbitrators in their efforts to resolve disputes, including whether a domain name violates a trademark relating to phrases of general use.</run on sentence>

While the overall purpose of the WIPO Jurisprudential Overview is to assist in predictability, it is important to point out that – as with any legal system – differences of opinion may exist on some specific issues and in certain outlier cases; all the more so as the UDRP operates across fact patterns and jurisdictions. Furthermore, neither this WIPO Jurisprudential Overview nor prior UDRP decisions are strictly binding on panelists, who will consider the particular facts and circumstances of each individual proceeding in a manner they consider fair. At the same time, panel findings tend to fall within the views summarized in this WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0. Finally, parties should note that the WIPO Jurisprudential Overview cannot serve as a substitution for each party’s obligation to argue and establish their particular case under the UDRP, and it remains the responsibility of each party to make its own independent assessment of prior decisions relevant to its case.

The consensus views laid out in this WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 have been welcomed by UDRP Panelists inter alia at WIPO’s Panelists Meetings convened in Geneva through 2016. The contents reflect the Meetings’ constructive dialogue, as well as substantial contribution and informal review from a number of the most experienced WIPO panelists. As WIPO UDRP jurisprudence matures, the WIPO Center, in consultation with its panelists, will on appropriate occasions consider undertaking further updates in whole or in part to this WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0. (The original edition and WIPO Overview 2.0 will continue to be accessible on the WIPO Center’s website for reference.)


[wipo.int ] Worth a bookmark.

Brought to light whilst scanning a recent UDRP proceeding related to the domain GoodLife.com.

Hey, who doesn't want to lead, live, have, experience the good life . . or hijack the matching domain from the clever registrant, who registered the domain YEARS before your TM registration?

Brett_Tabke

10:27 pm on May 21, 2022 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



So what is the moral here? Double check your domain registrations before you get the trademark?

Webwork

7:20 pm on May 31, 2022 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



It doesn't hurt to ocassionaly check generic word or widely adopted phrase domains for attempts to claim exclusive rights to employ that word or phrase.

This "may" be especially true when a person or entity comes-a-calling about such domains.

I many also be advisable when authorizing a domain broker to bring one of your domains to market . . cough . . because some may run straight to entities operating under such generic or widely adopted phrases . . cough . . argh . . sigh. (No unhappy story here. Just a bit of experience. Lesson #2: Be wary of "inviting trouble".)

The lesson is to entertain, if not assume, the possibility that some latecomer to your generic word or generic (widely adopted) phrase-domain may attempt, though a bit of over-reaching, to grab your domain . . and be prepared to fight back (i.e., be a lawyer :p ) . . including the possibility suiing the "reverse domain name hijacking" party for abuse of process.