Try to get this song out of your head.
The makers of the viral hit song Baby Shark have won a cybersquatting challenge against the owner of BabyShark.com.
Smart Study Co. and its Pinkfong division created the children’s song named after one of its characters. It became a viral sensation and the video on YouTube (embedded below) has nearly 10 billion views. It also reached #32 on the Billboard Hot 100 in January 2019.
Fans of Ted Lasso might even sing the name Jamie Tart in the theme of Baby Shark.
Smart Study filed a cybersquatting dispute with World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) against the domain name. The domain was once part of GoDaddy’s NameFind portfolio but appears to have been acquired by someone in late 2018. That person asked for $100,000 for the domain name. The domain owner didn’t make a formal response to the dispute.
WIPO panelist Warwick Rothnie ordered the domain name transferred to Smart Study.
Scary decision… you mean someone can make a song about my domain name, popularize it, and rightfully own it???!!!
No, but if you buy the domain after the song was made, then they can take it.
That said, there’s a bit more to the Baby Shark case. The song itself has a long history outside of Pinkfong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_Shark
Generic,did the respondent use the domain to deceive or post advertising.
A key issue with BabyShark*com were the PPC links.
If you own a URL EMD for a Trademark, avoid PPC.
At the same time, it seems TM holder reached out to Respondent, and Respondent made $100K offer.
“When the Respondent was approached in response to this offer, he reportedly initially sought a price for its transfer of USD 100,000.”
On other panels, this has been called a PLAN B filing.
A 3-panel team may have DENIED transfer on PLAN B grounds.
Content is always key. One screen shot of a PPC page pointing to the content which made the name famous implies bad-faith. Selling the name for too much is the same. The former owner can always litigate as the UDRP is not definitive. This is a good time to repeat the words Frank schilling told me years ago: “If you’re in the domain name business, you have to accept that you’re going to lose names from time to time.” Retailers deal with shoplifting and slip-and-falls. Domainers have the UDRP and lawyers.
Right decision. The 2018 registrant was clearly cybersquatting on a very famous and global brand name the prominence of which preceded the registration of the domain name.
WIPO panelist Warwick Rothnie has no idea what he is doing. His lack of insight into domain names is appalling. He should be removed as a WIPO panellist immediately.