Search results - found 813
A panel has denied the transfer of a domain name that matched the complainant’s trademark and declared that the complaint constituted an abuse of the UDRP proceeding. The panel found that the complainant had deliberately filed a complaint without any proper basis, as the complaint was "thoroughly deficient and consisted of less than half of one page in submissions in support of the complainant's case".
A UDRP panel has refused to order the transfer of a domain name that matched a complainant’s mark because the complainant failed to prove that the respondent registered and used the domain name in bad faith. The decision shows that, in cases where a complainant is relying on a mark that consists of an acronym, dictionary word, common phrase or common surname, the complainant has a heavier burden to establish that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith.
The European Data Protection Board has responded to ICANN’s call for guidance to enable the development of a GDPR-compliant model for access to personal data processed in the context of WHOIS. However, the eight-page document largely takes a broad-brush approach to guidance, raising the prospect that a more conservative approach to WHOIS data publication will result.
Last week we reported on a session at the ICANN meeting in Panama, in which the Government Advisory Committee heard from rights holders who have faced significant enforcement challenges following the enactment of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation. As the week went on, it became clear that those frustrations will continue for some time yet, despite government calls for urgent action.
Phishing attacks from domain name homographs represent a major threat to brand owners, new research reveals. A cyber security expert involved in the research has warned that this affects brands of all sizes and the threat is more overwhelming than that of counterfeiting, adding that those who ignore the findings “would have to be living in a fantasy land”.
An investigation from World Trademark Review has explored the evolving tactics of misleading and often malicious websites that pose as articles from well-known news outlets. Common trends include the use of cryptocurrency and Elon Musk to lure in users, with one expert telling us that tackling hoax articles targeting brands or public figures can feel like “a game of whack-a-mole”.
Last night ICANN published its draft Framework Elements for a Unified Access Model for Continued Access to Full WHOIS Data, which outlines how third parties may access non-public WHOIS data in the future. The document kicks off the effort to minimise the impact of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation on those with a legitimate interest in accessing WHOIS data but questions remain, not least over likely costs.
UDRP complaint unlikely to succeed without proof of bad-faith registration, even if respondent's subsequent use is questionable
In a recent decision under the UDRP, a panel has denied the transfer of a domain name that was confusingly similar to the complainant's trademark as it had been registered some 12 years before the complainant had adopted such mark. The case makes it clear that it is crucial to prove both registration and use in bad faith under the UDRP, even where the respondent’s subsequent use of the domain name is questionable.
In a blow for rights holders, the UK Supreme Court has decided that internet service providers (ISPs) should not bear the implementation costs for website blocking orders. Although the court endorsed the availability of blocking orders for rights holders, it reversed the costs position, finding that rights holders should indemnify the ISPs for the reasonable costs of implementing the orders.
ICANN steps up GDPR clarity bid, Squire Patton Boggs resolves China dispute, and insights from ECTA 2018: news round-up
In our latest round-up, we look at various insights from ECTA’s 37th annual conference, Squire Patton Boggs resolving a dispute in China over use of its name and related domain name, a potential disagreement between Jack Daniel’s and a Chambord estate, the Financial Times winning a trademark dispute, and how domain registrations for sports betting are on the rise.
In a recent decision under the UDRP, a three-member panel has refused to order the transfer of a domain name incorporating the complainant's trademark in its entirety. Interestingly, one panel member dissented, finding that the respondent did not have rights and legitimate interests in the domain name, even though it had not registered and used it in bad faith.
UDRP panel finds that respondent had competing legitimate interests - but dissenting panellist disagrees
In a recent decision under the UDRP, the majority of a three-member panel has denied the transfer of a domain name identically reproducing a complainant's trademark as the respondent had competing legitimate interests. However, a dissenting panellist was of the view that the respondent had failed to provide credible evidence in connection with a legitimate interest in the domain name.
The cassation court has confirmed that Black Friday Ltd, the owner of BLACK FRIDAY for services in Class 35, had abused its rights by suing an association of online shops for using the words 'Real Black Friday' and the domain name 'realblackfriday.ru'. Among other things, the court found that the designation 'Black Friday' had been used in many countries before the priority date of the trademark.
“You do what you can to reduce risk”: exclusive interview with Rovio Entertainment’s Robert Hagelstam
Legal counsel for IP rights at Rovio Entertainment, best known as the owner of hit mobile gaming app Angry Birds, Robert Hagelstam explains how the company won its high-stakes long-running battle with Chinese trademark squatters, reveals his approach to securing rights in the fast-moving mobile apps sectors, and told us that many brands tend to over-file for trademarks.
The European Union’s GDPR legislation, which came into force last Friday, has caused ongoing and significant concern around access to WHOIS data. To take the pulse of how brand protection service providers are dealing with the changes, and what it means for their customers, we spoke with three industry experts and the feedback to the regime was decidedly mixed.
After months of preparation and dire warnings of its impact, the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) became enforceable last Friday. On that same day, ICANN’s Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data became effective. However, as trademark professionals come to grips with what this all means for online policing, fears have been raised about future engagement with UDRP proceedings on the part of registries and registrars.
As entry into force of the GDPR looms ever closer, ICANN which is being forced to reform its WHOIS database has still not come up with a clear model that meets the long-term expectations of the Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, sparking concern among both rights holders and IP professionals.
In a recent decision under the UDRP, a panel has denied the transfer of a domain name consisting of a personal name on the grounds that such name was not used as a trademark at the time the domain name was registered. The case shows that a complainant wishing to recuperate a domain name containing their personal name cannot simply proceed to register a matching trademark to take advantage of the UDRP.
As Alibaba’s Anti-counterfeiting Alliance grows, is Amazon now the primary battleground in the war against fakes?
Alibaba Group has confirmed that membership to its Anti-counterfeiting Alliance has climbed to over 100 brands, a significant rise from the original 30 when the initiative launched in January 2017. While brand support for Alibaba appears to be growing, exclusive survey data reveals the Chinese giant is still a significant challenge for rights holders tackling fakes but respondents also claim that Amazon is “less and less willing to help brand owners”.
In a recent decision under the UDRP, a panel has denied the transfer of a domain name confusingly similar to the complainant's trademark as there was insufficient evidence that it was registered and used in bad faith to take advantage of the complainant's mark. The panel also found the complainant guilty of reverse domain name hijacking, partly due to its lack of diligence before the submission of the complaint.
Register for more free content
- Read more World Trademark Review blogs and articles
- Receive the editor's weekly review by email