• Home
  • About Us
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Awards
  • Privacy Policy
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS
TheDomains.com

Stolen Domain Name XAG.com Returned Via UDRP

October 2, 2015 by Michael Berkens

Michael Evans and Chord Consulting Inc. d/b/a XAG (“Complainant”), represented by John Berryhill,just got the stolen domain name xag.com returned in a one member panel UDRP decision:

John J. Upchurch found the Complainant has common law rights in the XAG mark through dating back to 2009 and found the domain holder registered and used the domain name in bad faith because it obtained the domain name through theft.

“Complainant has provided evidence of previously owning the domain name in dispute, xag.com.

Complainant has provided evidence of use in business related documents and in obtaining insurance in Exhibits D, E and C.

Complainant has also provided evidence of its use of the mark in Exhibits F and G. In addition, Complainant has provided documentation of having a trade name registered in the State of Washington, in Exhibit B. While past panels have held that a trade name does not establish rights, on its own, a combination of a trade name and secondary meaning may suffice to show rights under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

Complainant alleges that Respondent is not commonly known by the domain name, as the listed Registrant, “Philipp Dreyer,” is allegedly fictitious. Complainant has provided evidence of correspondence with the business located at the address listed in the WHOIS information, in Exhibit J, in which the business denied ownership of the domain name. Further, Complainant asserts that the listed telephone number has too many digits to be a valid Seattle phone number.

Past panels have found discrepancies between WHOIS information and domain names sufficient to show that a respondent is not commonly known by a domain name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii).

Complainant alleges that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the domain name under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii) because it was originally registered by Complainant and Respondent acquired it through theft.

Complainant has provided time stamped WHOIS information, in Exhibit I, to show that the domain’s registrant was changed in March, 2015.

Complainant asserts that this change came about by Respondent’s having compromised Complainant’s administrative e-mail address in order to authorize a change of registration. Panels have found that in situations exactly as Complainant purports to have occurred, respondents have failed to demonstrate a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) and Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).

Complainant also alleges that Respondent fails to use the domain name to provide a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use because the resolving website constitutes an inactive holding.

While Complainant has not provided documentation of this use, the Panel notes that the domain name does appear to resolve to an inactive website. Past panels have found that a failure to use a disputed domain name is sufficient to show a failure to provide a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) and Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii).

Complainant alleges that it previously owned the registration for the domain name, and that Respondent only acquired the domain name through theft by compromising Complainant’s administrative e-mail address in order to authorize a registration transfer. While past panels have not seen many instances of similar domain name theft, they have found that there is a likelihood of bad faith when a complainant previously owned a domain name and no longer does, unless there is evidence to suggest a lack of bad faith.

Filed Under: UDRP

About Michael Berkens

Michael Berkens, Esq. is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of TheDomains.com. Michael is also the co-founder of Worldwide Media Inc. which sold around 70K domain to Godaddy.com in December 2015 and now owns around 8K domain names . Michael was also one of the 5 Judges selected for the the Verisign 30th Anniversary .Com contest.

« Three Letter Domain ABG.com Held By Brand Protection Company CSC Hit With UDRP
New gTLD .Miami Gets Almost 5,000 Registrations After It’s 1st Day Of Availability »

Comments

  1. Bobby.Lafaye says

    October 2, 2015 at 7:09 pm

    It’s great that the domain was returned to the rightful owner, Mike.

    But what happens to the thief? There’s no legal consequence for the thief who illegally accessed the registrar account and transferred the domain. And they must have had access to the email account in order to approve the transfer, right?

    • John Berryhill says

      October 5, 2015 at 2:24 pm

      “But what happens to the thief?”

      Tracking down an individual responsible for a domain theft is often not possible. What happened to the guys who spilled all of the Sony data?

      • Bobby.Lafaye says

        October 5, 2015 at 3:05 pm

        Thanks for the response, John.

        I’d like to understand this decision so bear with me if you will.

        I understand the registrant was fictitious but was there an actual response by anyone to the complaint? But either way, the domain was transferred into a registrar account somewhere, and controlled by someone with financial ties to an account somewhere, so help me understand how it would be difficult to track them down and punish them.

        Appreciate your expertise.


Recent Articles

  • ChatGPT.net sells for $8,900 at DAN.com
  • What is a fair sales commission rate?
  • TXT.com sells for $300K

Recent Comments

  • Charles on What is a fair sales commission rate?
  • zakaria on What is a fair sales commission rate?
  • Steve on What is a fair sales commission rate?
  • Steve on ChatGPT.net sells for $8,900 at DAN.com
  • Snoopy on What is a fair sales commission rate?

Categories

Archives

Copyright ©2022 TheDomains.com — Published by Worldwide Media, Inc. — Site by Nuts and Bolts Media