Comments on: Ta Ta, WIPO. New Candidate for Worst UDRP Decision Ever http://domainnamewire.com/2009/08/30/ta-ta-wipo-new-candidate-for-worst-udrp-decision-ever/ News and Views for the Domain Name Industry Sat, 20 Mar 2010 04:07:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Patently Yours http://domainnamewire.com/2009/08/30/ta-ta-wipo-new-candidate-for-worst-udrp-decision-ever/comment-page-1/#comment-473859 Patently Yours Fri, 04 Sep 2009 08:47:17 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/?p=7973#comment-473859 I had blogged about this last week in my blog. While i do not agree with this WIPO decision, i would like to point out that Make my trip have been cybersquatting clearmytrip.net.in Clearmytrip is in the same business and mmt has no legitimate rights to register this. See the whois registry shows that it is in your name. http://whois.Domaintools.Com/cleartrip.Net.In On what moral ground are they asking for support in appealing against this decision. I had blogged about this last week in my blog.

While i do not agree with this WIPO decision, i would like to point out that Make my trip have been cybersquatting clearmytrip.net.in

Clearmytrip is in the same business and mmt has no legitimate rights to register this.
See the whois registry shows that it is in your name. http://whois.Domaintools.Com/cleartrip.Net.In

On what moral ground are they asking for support in appealing against this decision.

]]> By: WulfTheSaxon http://domainnamewire.com/2009/08/30/ta-ta-wipo-new-candidate-for-worst-udrp-decision-ever/comment-page-1/#comment-472122 WulfTheSaxon Tue, 01 Sep 2009 17:27:12 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/?p=7973#comment-472122 @Johnny apples.com, ironically (I do agree with you): 400 Bad Request Request cannot be handled by the server. Reason: Connection with Host: header containing unknown local host name "apples.com". Received on IP address 130.205.150.16, which is not bound to any virtual server. Cannot proceed. @Johnny

apples.com, ironically (I do agree with you):

400 Bad Request
Request cannot be handled by the server.

Reason: Connection with Host: header containing unknown local host name “apples.com”. Received on IP address 130.205.150.16, which is not bound to any virtual server. Cannot proceed.

]]> By: Jirgo http://domainnamewire.com/2009/08/30/ta-ta-wipo-new-candidate-for-worst-udrp-decision-ever/comment-page-1/#comment-471900 Jirgo Tue, 01 Sep 2009 07:41:24 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/?p=7973#comment-471900 Pavan Duggal heads a law firm in India. http://www.pavanduggalassociates.com . How does WIPO choose the arbiters?. Won't there be a clash of interest? Pavan Duggal heads a law firm in India.
http://www.pavanduggalassociates.com .

How does WIPO choose the arbiters?. Won’t there be a clash of interest?

]]> By: Snoopy http://domainnamewire.com/2009/08/30/ta-ta-wipo-new-candidate-for-worst-udrp-decision-ever/comment-page-1/#comment-471629 Snoopy Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:10:32 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/?p=7973#comment-471629 "Snoopy – I guess I shouldn’t create a site called “You are the apple of my eye”. After all, I know of the tech company Apple." I think that example would be several rungs lower in terms of potential trademark issues. Firstly Apple is a far more used term than "Ta Ta" in a generic sense and secondly the target market for the travel site is the same as Ta Ta's (being India's largest company). If it was an English or American company using the term "Ta Ta" I think it would be far more defendable, but it isn't, the are in the same backyard as TaTa, the potential issue should have been obvious when registering it. “Snoopy – I guess I shouldn’t create a site called “You are the apple of my eye”. After all, I know of the tech company Apple.”

I think that example would be several rungs lower in terms of potential trademark issues. Firstly Apple is a far more used term than “Ta Ta” in a generic sense and secondly the target market for the travel site is the same as Ta Ta’s (being India’s largest company).

If it was an English or American company using the term “Ta Ta” I think it would be far more defendable, but it isn’t, the are in the same backyard as TaTa, the potential issue should have been obvious when registering it.

]]> By: Andrew Allemann http://domainnamewire.com/2009/08/30/ta-ta-wipo-new-candidate-for-worst-udrp-decision-ever/comment-page-1/#comment-471430 Andrew Allemann Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:57:59 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/?p=7973#comment-471430 Kieren - nice. It's as if they have an automated UDRP filing system. Kieren – nice. It’s as if they have an automated UDRP filing system.

]]> By: Kieren McCarthy http://domainnamewire.com/2009/08/30/ta-ta-wipo-new-candidate-for-worst-udrp-decision-ever/comment-page-1/#comment-471396 Kieren McCarthy Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:16:21 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/?p=7973#comment-471396 Actually, we've been here before with an even more amusing decision regarding bodacious-tatas.com No, really. See the decision here: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-0479.html Kieren Actually, we’ve been here before with an even more amusing decision regarding

bodacious-tatas.com

No, really. See the decision here: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-0479.html

Kieren

]]> By: Andrew Allemann http://domainnamewire.com/2009/08/30/ta-ta-wipo-new-candidate-for-worst-udrp-decision-ever/comment-page-1/#comment-471332 Andrew Allemann Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:29:32 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/?p=7973#comment-471332 Anthony - TaTa's assertion, and the panelists agreement, that the company made no demonstrative plans to use the domain for a legitimate purpose just doesn't match the record of the domain's use since 2006. Anthony – TaTa’s assertion, and the panelists agreement, that the company made no demonstrative plans to use the domain for a legitimate purpose just doesn’t match the record of the domain’s use since 2006.

]]>