Legal News

When I saw a UDRP had been filed against PitStop.com by a company called Distribuidora Automotiva S.A., I spent a couple of minutes checking the Whois history at DomainTools. My non-legal conclusion was that this UDRP is DOA and it will result in a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH).

The domain name was defended by attorney John Berryhill, and the three member UDRP panel ruled in favor of the registrant. This was not a surprise. PitStop.com is a descriptive domain name, with the “pit stop” phrase used by brands and used generically throughout the world. One entity should not have the right to control the .com domain name for a descriptive term, in my opinion.

A UDRP was filed against the RedFig.com domain name at the National Arbitration Forum (NAF). The complainant in the UDRP is a company called Redfig LLC, and the respondent is a domain investor who was represented by attorney John Berryhill. The decision was published this morning, and the registrant prevailed and will retain the domain name.

In its argument, the complainant tried to convince the panel the domain name was being used in bad faith because it was listed for sale for more than the registration cost of a domain name:

“Respondent registered and uses the domain name in bad faith. The Domain Name is listed for sale on a third-party site for a sum which is well in excess of the cost of purchasing a domain name from a registrar.”

That didn’t fly with the panel.

A UDRP was filed against the generic one word Playhouse.com domain name at the World Intellectual Property Organization. The sole panelist, Robert A. Badgley, found in favor of the domain registrant and also ruled that this was Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH). The decision was published this morning on the WIPO website. Zak Muscovitch represented the domain registrant.

In the decision, the domain registrant’s sworn statement about acquiring domain names as investments was published:

A Belgian company called IBA SA filed a UDRP against the valuable IBA.com domain name at the World Intellectual Property Organization. Not surprisingly, the sole panelist, Nick J. Gardner, ruled in favor of the domain registrant. The panelist also ruled this was Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH). The decision was published today.

The complainant attempted to acquire the domain name for $2,500 in 2021 using a domain broker. According to the panelist’s interpretation of the discussion between the broker and the complainant, the broker told the complainant it” should offer over USD 25,000 if it wishes to make a credible offer.”