Panel refuses to give Tribune Media the ChannelGuide.com domain name.
Chad Folkening’s eCorp has beaten Goliath in a UDRP decision.
Folkening, who recently teamed up with John Ferber for Domain Holdings, is the registrant of over 1,000 “channel” domain names including ChannelGuide.com.
Tribune Company publishes a number of newspapers and web sites, including Chicago Tribune and L.A. Times. It also operates a service called Channel Guide. Channel Guide’s online presence is at a decidedly poor domain name: channelguidemag.zap2it.com. So the company filed a UDRP to try to upgrade its domain names.
eCorp argued that it registered the domain name in 1997 with plans to make it a hub for its many channel sites. The one person panel didn’t buy that argument, noting that it has been 14 years since the domain name was registered and it’s still parked. Of course, eCorp pointed out that Tribune Company let the domain name sit for 14 years without action.
However, panelist Christopher S. Gibson agreed that eCorp did not register the domain name in bad faith, writing:
…there is insufficient evidence to show that Respondent targeted Complainant and its CHANNEL GUIDE trademark, and thereby intended to disrupt Complainant’s business, when it registered the Domain Name almost 14 years ago in 1997. The CHANNEL GUIDE mark is comprised of two common words and Complainant has provided little evidence of the mark’s reputation or distinctiveness (outside of the trademark registration itself), all facts which weigh against a finding of relevant notice and targeting in this case… Further, Respondent has registered thousands of “channel-related†domain names, which is another point that weighs against a finding that there was targeting of Complainant’s trademark, in particular. Respondent has also indicated that the USPTO’s on-line searchable trademark database was not available in 1997, when the Domain Name was registered. In view of all the facts and circumstances presented in this case, the Panel determines, on balance, that the Domain Name was not registered in bad faith, even if it has been used by Respondent in an infringing and bad faith manner.
Gibson said the domain name may have been used in bad faith…an issue better left to the courts to decide. He denied Tribune Company’s case.
chad f says
Just wanted to follow up on this article to clarify some things. Its concerning to know courts still see timelines of development and need to be educated that alot of good things take time, 5,10,20 plus years. If I chose to implement my Streaming.com, ChannelGuide.com even 5 years ago, timing would have been to early. If your strategy is to buy land the first 20 years, then spend another 20 years developing that land, why should one be able to judge the owner who sits on land thats increasing in value and likely worth more sitting then building something the market may not want, need or can be full filled. I am glad we won and we have every right to own and develop the asset including a new, integrated Channel Guide but saying I have not done anything with it for 14 years is just crazy. I work everyday but since others can only see one thing, a ppc site for 14 years, they lose there ability to understand the underpinning of building businesses using Domain names as the asset class. My point being, domain owners need to start doing something with there names other then ppc. This is why I created another company Domain HOldings and working on some amazing DomainPower technology. If I had a site functioning as the domain name intends , would that be considered usage, verses PPC but a model that is not considered usage?
Andrew Allemann says
Chad, it’s a good question. Given that we have some panelists who think they should appraise domain names as part of their decisions, it will be interesting to see what they say about the relative development stage of a web site.