Panelist correctly denies complaint despite no response from domain name owner.
Yesterday I wrote about a a no good, very bad UDRP decision in which the domain owner didn’t respond but the panelist still shouldn’t have awarded the domain name to the complainant, Virgin.
Today comes a World Intellectual Property Organization decision with a non-response in which the panelist correctly denied the complaint.
Opus Group AB of Sweden filed the case against Opus Group LLC of New York.
We don’t know much about the domain owner, which didn’t respond to the dispute. But we do know that its name in Whois is Opus Group LLC, and Opus Group AB didn’t provide any evidence that this isn’t the actual registrant’s name.
That needed to be addressed because a company named Opus Group LLC would presumably have rights or a legitimate interest in the domain name OpusGroup.com.
Panelist Ian Lowe called the complainant on this. He also determined:
…the Panel considers that the Complainant has failed to demonstrate on any view that the Respondent is likely to have had the Complainant and its rights in any relevant trademark in mind at the time it registered the Domain Name, and that the Complainant has therefore failed to establish that the Domain Name was registered in bad faith.
It’s easy for a panelist to rubber stamp a complaint in which the domain owner doesn’t respond. Kudos to Ian Lowe for making the right decision in this case.
(The complainant also lost a case for Opus.group that is owned by a different group.)