I need a crash course in confusing similarity.
I don’t know, folks. Maybe it’s time for me to pack it up and go home.
Why the frustration?
After reading hundreds of UDRP cases apparently I still can’t figure out what “confusingly similar” is.
Today’s case in point? WIPO panelist David Perkins has awarded the domain name WeWannaBuyYourCar.com to a company with trademarked logos for “We Buy Any Car.com”.
OK, so ‘we’, ‘buy’, and ‘car’ are similar. But I think ‘wanna’ and ‘your’ kind of throw this off. What if the domain in dispute was “webuycars.com”? Would that be confusingly similar?
Perkins agreed with the complainant’s assertion that the “…phonetic pronunciation of their marks and the disputed domain name is similar due to the beginning and ending of the WEBUYANYCAR trademarks and the disputed domain name being identical, namely “weâ€ and “carâ€, and that is where the marks have the most impact on the consumer.”
Now there is certainly some similarity in the logos used by both the complainant and respondent. And apparently WeBuyAnyCar.com is extensively advertised in the UK where both parties are.
But this doesn’t seem like something UDRP was created to address. It may be a trademark dispute, but it’s certainly not a cybersquatting dispute.
David J Castello says
Doesn’t make sense. There has to be more going on here.
Andrew Allemann says
David, I think the panelist felt the respondent was doing something wrong so he just found a way to get past the limitations of UDRP.
Hi guy I own webuyanycaronline.co.uk
Domain name do you think this will go against there tradebmark as confusing customer, because recently webuyanycar solicitors got in touch with me threatening to shut down the website.
Help me please; i have put the website under construction.
If you think this is a case to fight
John Berryhill says
I agree that this doesn’t necessarily look as though it should have been dealt with in a UDRP case.
I live in the UK and WeBuyAnyCar.com is indeed very heavily advertised and has increased its awareness because of how catchy the advert is. It is an advert that you find so annoying you have to sing along to yourself.
WeWannaBuyYourCar.com jumped out at me the other day as they had started to advertise their site and you would honestly have confused the two because of the similarities of not only their logo but i think the advert itself.
Should have been dealt with in another manner imo.
domain guy says
no andrew do not pack up and go home domainers need your expertese.you are asking a question for an ip attorney. the area is likelihood of confusion.and then the dupont factors come into play..there are 8 of them and each one has a different weight.things change when there is a design element attached to the registed tm.this case and decision is out of the realm of the udrp.its for trademark court. the single arbitrator overstepped his authority.this case would become a real money pit.probably why the arbitrator issued a decision.
I agree with domain guy.
The arbitrator overstepped his authority.
However, if the respondent was aware of the dispute and intentionally ignored it, then I would assume that the respondent doesn’t care to lose it.
Otherwise, I presume he will be challenging it in court.
No, you are spot on. That is just bad for domains.
Tim Marland says
just seen this one on a TV commercial. http://www.wewillbuyyourcar.com/ UDRP? this will be interesting.