Domain attorney helps registrant keep domain name in UDRP.
When you think of “propeller head”, what comes to mind? I think of those beanie hats with a propeller on them. You know, the type that nerds wear. Pilots might think of the plane part.
But a software company thought it should have rights to PropellerHead.com. Unfortunately for Propellerhead Holding AB, it couldn’t convince a three person panel at National Arbitration Forum.
The registrant of PropellerHead.com at one time had the domain parked at Hitfarm with links that may be competitive to the software company. But before receiving the complaint, it had switched the landing page to a generic page with a search box.
The panel decided that the domain was not registered and used in bad faith, giving victory to Goldberger and his team. But I’m surprised at the brevity of the panel’s written decision. Goldberger appears to have asked for a finding of reverse domain name hijacking. Panels usually consider all three elements of a case when reverse domain name hijacking is alleged, yet in this case it only considered the bad faith argument. The panel punted and merely wrote:
“The Panel does not find that Complainant has attempted to engage in reverse domain name hijacking.”
It provided no reasoning whatsoever.
Read the decision here.
Andrew
Was just going to write on this topic.
I won a similar case yesterday with brassrail.com, with Ari representing us as well.
The panel found that the complainant didn’t even meet the first requirement of the 3, they have to meet,and dismissed the claim on that basis.
If you have to meet 3 criteria and fail to even meet the first, shouldn’t that be enough to show reverse domain hijacking?
Andrew or Michael, could you provide an “average cost” that it takes to defend a case like these from the domain owner’s side? The other way around as well if you happen to know. Let’s say somebody using Ari’s team to defend etc.
Jamie
Figure on somewhere around $3-6K per depending on who you use, how much volume you have and whether you opt for a 3 member panel or go with 1 guy
Michael – I assume Ari asked them to find reverse domain hijacking? It seems like panels are just taking the easy way out. I know they don’t get paid much, but they have a duty to follow the guidelines.
Andrew….I have been following recent UDRP cases and have noticed a trend by panelists where they just plain ignore the notion of reverse domain name hijacking now.
It’s as if they have all secretly agreed that they are going to stop giving domain owners their due rights.
That is extremely odd that no follow-up comment about the reverse domain hijacking decision. It’s bizarre.
Could you imagine if a court saying a defendant is guilty but not giving a reason for the conclusion?
.
Thank you Michael @ # 3.
Andrew
Yes Ari did ask for such a finding.