Reverse domain name hijacking? Nope, UDRP slamdunk for the Complainant

This is an unfortunate decision for the owner of AceCapital.com, a domain name registered in 1997. Its owner appears to have owned it since around 2012, perhaps after acquiring it in the secondary domain market.

Despite the generic characteristics of the domain, and the lack of a registered trademark by the Complainant, the decision was heavily influenced by the Respondent’s lack of any response.

Royal Wealth Management, Inc. is doing business (“DBA“) as Ace Capital, having incorporated in 2008. However, there is no current registered trademark for “Ace Capital”; we located an application that was filed on February 16, 2014.

The Complainant claimed that the Respondent attempted to sell the domain for substantially more than his “out of pocket” costs of “under $500.” No proof of claim was provided for this UDRP, something that a lawyer retained for the Respondent would have pointed out.

The domain name AceCapital.com is still listed for sale at Sedo, with a minimum asking price of $4,850 dollars.

Thus, Darryl C. Wilson, Panelist ruled on the AceCapital.com UDRP, delivering a decision for the Complainant, and ordering AceCapital.com to be transferred.

With no legal representation, the Respondent lost this case, which had plenty of potential to bear a classic reverse domain name hijacking decision.

Read the full decision here.

This post is 100% true!

This post is 100% true!

Copyright © 2024 DomainGang.com · All Rights Reserved.

Comments

4 Responses to “Reverse domain name hijacking? Nope, UDRP slamdunk for the Complainant”
  1. Rob says:

    I don’t necessarily agree with the decision, but I also don’t find acecapital.com to have particularly “generic characteristics” as the author suggests. But if the owner doesn’t even respond to a UDRP, then too bad for them.

  2. DomainGang says:

    Rob – As with other UDRP cases, the domain in question is a two word composite (ace + capital) without a secondary meaning – no existing tm other than the recently applied one.

    From the looks of it, the Complainant registered their domain in 2013!

  3. Nuno says:

    With so many other worldwide companies using that expression as their brands and company’s name, who knows if the complainant doesn’t get an UDRP as well?

  4. Steve says:

    A simple search shows that MANY companies are operating as ace capital all over the world. Another example of a kangaroo court helping a$$holes steal domains. Its unbelievable that the arbi”traitor” couldnt do a simple search. PATHETIC system.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters available