Merriam Webster defines the word “botanica” as “a shop that deals in herbs and charms used especially by adherents of Santeria.” When it comes to domain names, botanica is a popular keyword, with DomainTools showing 190 domain names registered with botanica as the keyword. In my opinion, Botanica.com is the most valuable of these registered domain names.

Unfortunately for the registrant of Botanica.com, a UDRP was filed against the domain name at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The complainant in this UDRP is a company called Botanica GmbH. I believe this company operates on a ccTLD extension.

Attorney Jason Schaeffer of ESQWire.com recently won a UDRP proceeding in defense of Aveed.com. The UDRP was filed at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Although the three member panel did not rule give a RDNH ruling, I think some of the language in the decision could prove to be useful to investors.

Aveed.com was acquired by a domain investor for $1,025 on January 16, 2021. The decision did not mention it, but NameBio shows the domain name was sold via GoDaddy Auctions. This means the auction would have been available for anyone to participate, including the complainant.

Here’s an excerpt from the decision where the panel opined on the strategy of acquiring domain names for investment purposes via expiry domain auction:

Yesterday afternoon, I noticed a UDRP was filed against the high value, one word, Mahogany.com domain name. Because the UDRP was filed at the NAF, the complainant was not publicly known. There are hundreds of companies that have the word Mahogany as part of their branding, and in addition, there are many companies that sell mahogany, a popular high-end type of timber.

It was pointed out to me on Twitter that Rob Monster posted a copy of the notice he received regarding this UDRP since Mahogany.com is registered at Epik. Apparently, the complainant in the UDRP is Hallmark Licensing, the greeting card company:

I’ve heard differing opinions about setting up a catch all email for domain names owned by investors. What this means is that any email sent to any email address for that domain name will be delivered to an inbox controlled by the domain registrant. Whether emails received are typos or spam messages, everything gets delivered. I have never been a fan of doing this, and a recent UDRP loss illustrates why it can put a domain name in peril.

A UDRP was filed against Magna.CO at WIPO. The complainant, Magna International Inc.,  uses the Magna.com domain name for its website. When I saw that the Magna.CO domain name was lost in the UDRP, I was curious to see what happened. In my opinion, without considering the usage of the domain name, Magna seems like a generic term. As such, Magna.CO should conceivably be safe to own.

A company called Pet Plan Ltd. filed a UDRP against MyPetPlans.com at WIPO. This company has filed many successful UDRPs to protect its intellectual property, so it’s not a big surprise it took issue with this particular domain name. The complainant lost the UDRP proceeding but ended up getting control of the domain name despite this. The UDRP is WIPO Case No. D2021-0062.

The domain registrant did not submit an official response to the UDRP. Instead, upon receiving notice of default, the domain registrant told WIPO, “This dispute has been resolved via Nominet and the domain has been transferred to the complainant.” Presumedly because the UDRP was already paid for, the respondent’s preemptive decision to hand over the domain name did not cause the panel to terminate the UDRP or simply decide in favor of the complainant.

A three member UDRP panel decided the SHIL.com and HSIL.com UDRP was brought in bad faith, and a Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) ruling was made. The decision has not yet been published at the World Intellectual Property Organization, but it is case WIPO D2020-3416 and should be made public tomorrow.

The complainants in the UDRP are listed as HSIL Limited, Somany Home Innovation Limited / SHIL Ltd and Brilloca Limited. I was a bit confused about why different companies filed a single UDRP for more than one domain name, but it appears the companies are related to each other.

These two domain names are owned by a company called Get On The Web, which owns many short and valuable acronym domain name. Attorney John Berryhill represented the domain registrant in the UDRP, and he put up a strong case to defend the rights of the registrant and show that the UDRP should not have been brought at all. Not only did the panel rule in favor of the domain registrant, but the panel discussed several reasons for why this UDRP constituted RDNH: