How did one panelist think a domain should be transferred when the other two say the case was brought in bad faith?
It’s fairly rare that a panelist files a dissenting opinion in a UDRP. Usually a three person panel comes to the same conclusion, although occasionally you’ll see a dissent.
But a recent decision treads even further into “rare” territory: 2 panelists thought the case was so egregious, it qualified at Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. A third panelist actually found in favor of the complainant.
The case pitted European giant easyGroup Limited against Hong Kong company Easy Group Holdings Limited, which registered the domain name in 1998. The domain was registered before easyGroup got any trademark rights in the name (it already ran EasyJet, but hadn’t yet become the conglomerate it is today). The respondent runs a business with the term “easy” in it. Click here to continue reading…