By Andrew Allemann Leave a Comment October 4, 2024

The domain was evidently registered without any malicious intent.

One should be cautious when a domain registered through CSC faces a UDRP challenge.

CSC primarily serves brand owners. Although it’s feasible that a client of CSC might engage in cybersquatting, it should certainly raise concerns.

Today marked a significant development with the publication of a decision.

Polydec SA initiated a case against Polydec.com, a domain owned by Knauf Information Services GmbH.

The Complainant operates under the domain polydec.ch and specializes in manufacturing precision components for the medical, watchmaking, automotive, and electronics sectors. The company has been in operation since 1985.

The disputed domain was first registered in 1998 for the French POLYDEC group of companies, with the Respondent taking ownership of one of these entities in 2013.

Polydec SA contended that the Respondent’s rights to the mark had lapsed, claiming there was no longer a valid reason to use the domain, which had not directed to a website for several years.

Well, that doesn’t quite fit the definition of cybersquatting.

Panelist Adam Talor ruled in favor of Knauf Information Services, determining this situation to be a classic case of reverse domain name hijacking. He stated:

The Complaint acknowledges that the disputed domain name was established in 1998 and does not assert a later relevant registration date, even though the Complainant mentions the Respondent’s acquisition of the business in 2013. Regardless, the Complainant should have recognized that both dates came before the Complainant’s registered trademark rights, and it should have justified why the registration or acquisition of the disputed domain should be considered as having been done in bad faith. Additionally, the Panel noted that the Complainant was fully aware that the disputed domain name had been registered or acquired legitimately within a completely different sector than that of the Complainant, even submitting proof of the expired trademarks held by the Respondent’s predecessors. The Complainant, or at least its representatives, must have understood that there was little chance of demonstrating that the disputed domain name had been registered in bad faith, which is a requisite criterion of the Policy.

However, the Complaint did not make a substantial attempt to demonstrate that the registration was made in bad faith. Instead, it focused on asserting that there was usage made in bad faith. Even in this regard, the Complaint leaned on several weak arguments primarily revolving around the supposed (and, in fact, unverified) “refusal” of the Respondent to accept the Complainant’s plea to transfer the contested domain name to them.

Infosuisse advocated on behalf of the Complainant, while the Respondent represented themselves.

Categories: Policy & Law Tags: reverse domain name hijacking, udrp, world intellectual property organization

Welcome to DediRock, your trusted partner in high-performance hosting solutions. At DediRock, we specialize in providing dedicated servers, VPS hosting, and cloud services tailored to meet the unique needs of businesses and individuals alike. Our mission is to deliver reliable, scalable, and secure hosting solutions that empower our clients to achieve their digital goals. With a commitment to exceptional customer support, cutting-edge technology, and robust infrastructure, DediRock stands out as a leader in the hosting industry. Join us and experience the difference that dedicated service and unwavering reliability can make for your online presence. Launch our website.