A few days ago we let you know that Twitter won the rights to the domain name Twitter.org by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
The domain name was held under privacy at Moniker.com
The domain name has an original registration date of October 2005.
The domain name transferred to privacy into privacy in late 2011.
The decision has now been issued.
The case was a slam dunk with the domain holder failing to file an answer the panel found that the “domain name was registered well after the Complainant’s mark was in use. ”
“The Panel finds that the Respondent must have had notice of the Complainant’s mark and business when registering the disputed domain name.”
“The Panel finds that the incorporation of the mark in question in its entirety as part of the disputed domain name is an indication of bad faith under the circumstances.”
“The Panel also infers that that the Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain name was intended to disrupt the Complainant’s business, in particular by damaging the Complainant’s reputation, as a result of members of the public visiting the Respondent’s website thinking that it was related to the Complainant or its business, but running the risk of being infected by malware instead as asserted by the Complainant without rebuttal from the Respondent. ”
“The distribution of malware through a deceptive domain name is in this Panel’s view to be regarded as deceptive and malicious conduct sufficient to show that a domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith”
This is stupid, actually no, it is STUPID!
So, birds will no longer be allowed to twitter in the trees without fear of being sued by a TM??
Bird watchers beware when describing what you see…
Come on people….!
Interesting case decision. This dot org domain preceded the launch of Twitter and their TM. Therefore, the dot org was not registered in bad faith.
The trick here is to develop a popular dot com and get a TM. Once you become big, then take all the extensions below you. Sounds like a monopoly to me (IMO).
The panel found the domain name was
“registered in June 2011.”
Now it was obviously owned prior to that date, maybe transferred sold, registered I don’t know but the domain holder didn’t respond.
Also The panels hate those survey/you just one, type of sites more than parked pages which maybe fine as long as you don’t have links related to the complainant or their competitors.
“”In this case, the Complainant contends that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name well after the Complainant established its rights in the well-known TWITTER mark. The widespread use of the well-known services provided by the Complainant, with over 500 million users worldwide, and at the time of the registration of the disputed domain name, with more than 27 million visitors a month to the Complainant’s website making it one of the most visited websites in the world, makes it difficult if not impossible to believe that the Respondent was unaware of the Complainant’s mark at the time of the registration of the disputed domain name.””
“”The Panel also finds that there is no evidence that the Respondent has been known by the disputed domain name. There is no evidence that the Respondent has been granted any license or other rights to use the Complainant’s marks for any purposes or evidence that the Complainant is associated or affiliated with the Respondent. Indeed, all the evidence points the other way.””
“”The Complainant further contends that the website associated with the disputed domain name is just a malware website. It creates great confusion among the users of the Complainant’s services and those who visit the Respondent’s website thinking it belongs to the Complainant and puts them at risk.””
Don’t think this is the one to feel bad for