Panel rules against company claiming rights to LegalAdvice.org.
A company called Capitalism, Inc. didn’t quite get the legal advice it needed in a recent UDRP case.
The company asked a National Arbitration Forum panel to give it the domain name LegalAdvice.org.
No such luck, the panel ruled.
After all, it’s merely a descriptive term. Capitalism, Inc does have a trademark on the term, but not in the class of legal services.
The terms of the
domain name are common and descriptive, when applied to the use employed by Respondentâ€”the rendering of “legal adviceâ€ to browsers. Had Complainant attempted to register LEGAL ADVICE in International Class 45, for example, which includes legal services, it seems very doubtful that it would have issued. Rather, Complainant’s use of the mark is unusual when describing mortgage and job finding related services and can therefore uniquely identify the source. In the field of legal services, Complainant’s mark has no such power. Therefore, Complainant does not have an exclusive monopoly on the terms on the Internet. The terms of the disputed domain name are actually descriptive of the services offered at the website to which it resolves.
UDRP panelist James A. Carmody wimped out on finding reverse domain name hijacking, though. He cited Capitalism, Inc’s trademark as enough reason to not find RDNH.
OK, commence “capitalism” jokes about buying domain now…