Trademarks need to be valid for a UDRP to succeed.
A panelist at the WIPO has made a great observation, after deciding to deny a UDRP for the Complainant, despite a lack of response by the Respondent.
In a case involving the domain name, YourNeighborhood.com, the Complainant brought forth his registered trademark as part of the UDRP particulars.
Conveniently, however, he omitted the part involving the exclaiming of the very words he attempted to validate; the trademark is for “YourNeighborhood Love Where You Live“.
The part “Your Neighborhood” is exclaimed in the trademark application, which means that the applicant chose at the time to not pursuit exclusivity in using this pair of words, allowing for the actual trademark application to be approved.
Robert A. Badgley examined the trademark very closely, stating:
“Even though the “confusing similarity” element of a claim under the Policy is generally regarded as a relatively low hurdle for a Complainant to clear, the Panel here rejects Complainant’s assertion that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to a mark in which Complainant has rights. The absence of the text “love where you live” from the Domain Name is enough to thwart any claim to confusing similarity.”
Great seeing WIPO panelists taking the extra effort to examine all the facts before delivering a decision. This is a case, where the Respondent, had he actually responded, could have asked for a finding of reverse domain name hijacking.
For the full text of the UDRP against YourNeighborhood.com, click here.
