Sometimes when I see a UDRP filing, my first thought is that the domain name seems very generic. This is what I thought when I saw the GlobalVision.com UDRP filing at the National Arbitration Forum (NAF), and it looks like the panelist agreed. This is case # FA1804001783819.
From the opening discussion about the domain name and its history provided by the respondent (domain registrant), it seemed pretty inevitable that the owner would retain the domain name. Here’s what the registrant said:
“Complainant’s GLOBAL VISION is made up of common, generic terms and Complainant may not maintain an exclusive monopoly on such terms.
Respondent has rights and legitimate interests in the domain name dating back to February 22, 1995, when Respondent registered the domain name. The domain name is used by an existing, active company.”
The panelist’s findings section confirms this and also mentions that the complainant tried to buy the domain name in 2016 but was unsuccessful:




