China ready, but not ready for a UDRP.
Domain name investor Warren Weitzman has successfully defended his domain name ChinaReady.com, and the panel found complainant China Ready and Accredited Pty Ltd to have engaged in reverse domain name hijacking by bringing the case.
The complainant uses the lengthy domain name chinareadyandaccredited.com.
It claimed first use of the “China Ready” mark dating to 2012. But Weitzman registered ChinaReady.com back in 2006. See the problem for the complainant? If so, you’re one step ahead of the complainant’s lawyer.
Weitzman parked the domain name, which showed advertising links related to the descriptive nature of “China ready”. The three-person panel wrote:
In this case, the Panel considers that the Disputed Domain Name consists of the common phrase “China Ready” and the pay-per-click links come within at least a generally understood meaning of the phrase i.e. “ready for China”. Considering this against the background of the Respondent’s apparent business in advertising and domain monetizing services for others using numerous domain names over the years, and that there is no evidence of the Respondent intentionally targeting the Complainant and/or its business in using the Disputed Domain Name, the Panel considers the Respondent has rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name.
In finding that China Ready and Accredited Pty brought the case in bad faith, the panel noted that it was impossible that Weitzman targeted the complainant given that he registered the domain name before the complainant existed.
Weitzman was represented by Greenberg & Lieberman, LLC. The complainant was represented by Axis Legal (Australia) Pty Limited.
Good for Warren!
Congratulations to Warren Weitzman. and Stevan Lieberman.
Stevan did a great job in securing a RDNH.
Another case for Hall of Shame??
The guilty legal team here is Axis Legal’s Sara Delpopolo (principal), http://www.axislegal.com.au/team/. Nice to put a face to a Federal offense.
This dispute wasn’t an isolated incident. Sara Delpopolo misled the panel on behalf of an Australian salon in the MOROCCANTAN.COM dispute. That domain was registered in 3/2011 by a US registrant. The Complainant’s USPTO intent-to-use filing of 8/2013 reveals that their first use (in Australia) was 11/2011. But Sara Delpopolo’s team hid that filing and that date from the Panel. They tossed some mud on the Whois, and then coyly alleged common law rights “from 2011.”
Did sloppy Panelist Matthew S. Harris simply check the USPTO? Nope. He decides the Complainant’s blatant obfuscation is “curious” and “inferences can be drawn” and then hands over this asset.
The Complainant hid their USPTO filing, because it would be plain that they’re trying to steal a top-selling global trademark. Which is not a new trick to anyone except Panelist Matthew S. Harris. A US public company called Xen-Tan has sold “Moroccan Tan” worldwide, dating from at least May 2013. In August 2013, the Australian Complainant slipped in their USPTO intent-to-use filing as “moroccantan” only. The Complainant didn’t have any trademarks outside Australia until after Xen-Tan’s Moroccan Tan was selling off Marks and Spencer’s shelves in the UK…where the Australian Complainant wished to expand.
Panelists like Matthew S. Harris need to ask themselves, when something seems “curious,” if they’re willing to do the legwork: Are you going to solicit further submissions? Going to look up the obscured data yourself? Have you been to Morocco? Are you familiar with the bog standard, world-famous commodity “Moroccan oil” aka “argan oil,” used in numerous sun products worldwide? Familiar with this remote and complex trademark issue upon which your Forum cannot adjudicate? No? Of course you’re not. So stop “assuming” anything, Scarlet Pimpernel.
If ANY party registered the domain before the trademark registration, then it is not within the UDRP’s delimited purview. Go direct to “generic,” or “domain registration pre-dates Complainant’s mark,” do not pass go, do not pass off a US public company’s successful worldwide trademark to a lying Australian salon.
China Ready and Accredited Pty has been judged to be a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker.
Being branded a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker isn’t exactly a label that shouts out “reputable”.
How ironic then that according to their website, China Ready and Accredited’s training “shows Chinese customers you are a reputable business”. Haha!
In China where it is all about “face”, I am sure they are thanking Axis Legal’s team for helping.