Company intentionally provided incomplete material evidence, panel determines.
Ferm-O-Feed B.V., a fertilizer company based in the Netherlands, has been found to have engaged in reverse domain name hijacking over the domain name Fertiplus.com.
The World Intellectual Property Organization panel determined that Ferm-O-Feed “provided intentionally incomplete material evidence.”
The case follows a familiar pattern found in UDRP filings:
A company first tries to buy a domain name by reaching out to the owner (either via email or an online form). Once it receives a quote for the domain name, it then provides the quote to the panel and suggests that the domain owner reached out to it to try to sell the domain rather than just responding to an inbound request.
This matters because the Complainant is using the communications to suggest that the domain owner targeted its trademark and company with the domain registrations.
The panel provides a whole host of reasons that the domain wasn’t registered and used in bad faith, and found that the fertilizer company filed the case in abuse of the policy by not providing a complete picture of the communication. This, despite a warning by the domain owner’s counsel Zak Muscovitch.