ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[ga] Re: FYI: Final WIPO-2 Report released


From: http://wipo2.wipo.int/process2/report/html/report.html

59.   Several cases regarding place names within countries also have been filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center under the UDRP.[251]  Two of these cases that involved city names have received much attention.  These two cases concerned the domain names barcelona.com and stmoritz.com.  By decision of August 4, 2000, the complaint regarding barcelona.com was upheld and, by decision of August 17, 2000, the complaint regarding stmoritz.com was denied.[252]  Other more recent such cases filed with WIPO concerned the domain names lapponia.org/lapponia.net (complaint granted),[253] portofhelsinki.com (complaint denied),[254] portofhamina.com (complaint denied),[255] brisbanecity.com (complaint denied),[256] brisbane.com (complaint denied),[257] olkiluoto.com/olkiluoto.net (complaint denied),[258] rouen.com/rouen.net (complaint denied)[259] and arena-verona.com (complaint denied).[260]
260.   It should be noted that the complaints in many of the court and UDRP cases referred to above were based on the alleged abuse of a trademark registered in the name of the complainant and incorporating the place name subject to the dispute.  Furthermore, usually the domain names were deemed infringing in light of the nature of the activity conducted under the domain name and the motivation of the registrants.  The cases therefore do not necessarily stand for the proposition that the registration of a city name or the name of a region, as such, is to be deemed abusive.
** end **
Shouldn't each of the 3 prongs of the udrp (tm / lack of legitimate interest / bad faith) be seperate entities rather than influencing each other?
Barcelona never held a live tm for "barcelona" as I recall.
 
If I read that correctly, it implies that if lack of legitimate interest or bad faith is found that the strength of the tm doesn't really matter - that seems at odds with the UDRP rules.
 
Why bother with 3 seperate tests if you can imply guilt in all of them from just one.
Regards
Paul Cotton


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>