Owner of Unbiased.co.uk takes another crack at Unbiased.com.
The owner of Unbiased.co.uk has failed for a second time to get the domain name Unbiased.com through a UDRP.
The company, which helps people find financial advisers, mortgage brokers, solicitors and accountants, filed a UDRP against Unbiased.com in 2015. It lost that case because the panel determined that it was likely that the domain was acquired due to its generic value, not to target Unbiased.co.uk.
It filed another case in January but apparently didn’t bring anything new to the table. The three-member World Intellectual Property Organization panel declined to consider the refiled case.
Panelist Neil Anthony Brown concurred with the majority opinion that the case should be dismissed and said this is a case of reverse domain name hijacking. Brown pointed out that Unbiased.co.uk didn’t mention its first failed attempt at securing the domain in a UDRP when filing the second dispute and chose a different venue (National Arbitration Forum and then WIPO).
This is therefore the classic case where it can be said that the Complainant must have intended to harass the Respondent and put it to timewasting expense to defend this claim for the second time, as it knew it could not succeed without good cause being shown why the case could be commenced. If ever there were a case showing the wisdom of the Canadian rule that in an appropriate case the panel may award part of a respondent’s costs against an offending complainant, this must be it. But in the absence of power to award costs against a recalcitrant complainant, making a finding of RDNH is the only sanction that can be imposed.
While Unbiased.co.uk doesn’t have a good argument to win a UDRP, the domain name owner should seriously consider removing links to financial services on its parked page.