Panelist lets complainant off the hook for filing dead-on-arrival UDRP.
A World Intellectual Property Organization panel has found in favor of the owner of Maaji.com in a UDRP case, but for some strange reason did not find the complainant guilty of reverse domain name hijacking.
The case falls in line with previous reverse domain name hijacking decisions. The domain name owner registered the domain name in 2001. The earliest the complainant claims use of the term Maaji in commerce was 2007. How could the domain owner have registered the domain name in bad faith?