Frindle results on Google.
Fanciful marks, as in the case of Frindle.com, have an advantage when such domains get involved in the UDRP process.
Domain names that utilize a non-generic mark, often referred to as “brandable” among domain investors, can be defended directly by the trademark holder.
Frindle.com was registered in 2000 by Andrew Clements, writer of a children’s book by the same title, “Frindle.”
Mr. Clements received a trademark registration for FRINDLE in 2000, but it lapsed due to failure to maintain its renewal. At the same time, the domain Frindle.com lapsed sometime in 2015, and someone from Japan scooped it up.
Armed with a new trademark registration for FRINDLE in 2014, Mr. Clements filed a UDRP to reclaim Frindle.com.
According to the complaint, the Respondent asked for $999 in exchange for Frindle.com, turning down Mr. Clements’ offer of $500.
“First, Complainant claims that Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. Complainant has included evidence to indicate that Respondent has listed the disputed domain name on <sedo.com> in an attempt to sell it. […] In fact, after offering Respondent $500.00 to buy the disputed domain name Respondent countered with $999.00 at which point Complainant halted contact and initiated this proceeding.”
The Complainant stated that the word “Frindle” is completely made up and hence a “fanciful mark” that cannot possibly be of any legitimate use to the Respondent.
Neil Anthony Brown, sole panelist at the National Arbitration Forum, sided with this opinion and ordered the transfer of Frindle.com to the Complainant.
Read the full UDRP text about Frindle.com.
