The complainant’s lawyer and one of the panelists were in the same law school class and worked at the same law firm.
Take a look at this World Intellectual Property Organization decision for the domain name ProntoPro.com.
In a 2-1 decision, the majority of the panel found that the Atlanta company that registered ProntoPro.com did not violate the UDRP because the domain owner had rights or legitimate interests in the domain name.
You can read the decision and I think you’ll agree with the majority of the panel that it’s far-fetched to think an Atlanta company that deals in local services was trying to attract business meant for a company in Italy (where the complainant is based).
The third panelist, Nicoletta Colombo, who was nominated by the complainant, found otherwise. Colombo said the domain owner didn’t show any rights or legitimate interests in the domain name despite operating a company in Atlanta called Pronto.
Colombo is in Italy. So your first thought might be a bit of country pride. But dig a bit deeper and it gets troubling.
The complainant’s counsel was Alessandra Ferreri. Ferreri happens to also be a WIPO panelist. She graduated from Università degli Studi in Milan in 1993 and then worked for Rapisardi Intellectual Property from 2000-2014.
Colombo also graduated from Università degli Studi in Milano in 1993. She also worked for Rapisardi Intellectual Property from 1995-2009.
So both the complainant’s counsel and the dissenting panelist are WIPO panelists. They also appear to have been in the same class at law school. They subsequently worked for the same law firm.
Does that seem troubling to you?