Hi Chris,
In 2000, a WIPO complaint was filed for EdwardVanHalen.com The complaint
was
denied in favor of the respondent, as a fan site was considered a
legitimate
use.
Case Number | Domain Name | Complainant | Respondent | Result of Decision
D2000-1313 | edwardvanhalen.com | Edward Van Halen | Deborah Morgan |
Complaint denied
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-1313.html
"Complainant has also established that Respondent has no rights or
legitimate interests in respect of the domain names at issue. Respondent
is
not known as Edward Van Halen, nor is she using or preparing to use the
domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services.
Nor does the domian name clearly indicate the unofficial or fan status of
her proposed website."
"Her status as a fan might perhaps justify a finding of legitimate
interests
if she provided evidence of offline fan activity of which the website was
an
extension or if the website had been operational for a sufficient period.
However, under the circumstances, Respondent merely has an expectation of
developing a legitimate interest in the domain name at issue."
"Simply put, the evidence here is insufficient to justify a finding of bad
faith. Instead, Respondent claims that she has a desire to use the domain
name for a legitimate fan site and, if she follows through on that
intention, it would not constitute the kind of abusive, bad faith
cybersquatting that the Policy is designed to prevent."
Please note that we are not attorneys and any comments here are only our
personal opinion. If anyone requires legal advice, they should seek
qualified legal counsel.
Sincerely,
Ted
Prophet Partners Inc.
http://www.ProphetPartners.com
http://www.Premium-Domain-Names.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "ga" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "vinton g. cerf" <vint@xxxxxxxxxx>; "icann
board address" <icann-board@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] Registerfly domain renewal issues
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/d2006-1118.html
This continues to amaze me. Taking down fan sites because they are
similar
to what they are a fan of. It makes no sense whatsoever. BarbieFans.com
would go to mattel because it has the name barbie in it.
But the corporations get more leeway than individual users. An example,
the
high cost of arbitration. Individual users have a hard time hiring a
lwayer
and paying high fees to go into arbitration. If you want a 3 member panel
it
costs more. A corporation has lawyers on staff and can afford to do this
all
the time to grab up more and more domain names while an individual user
does
not have that same ability.
They send out emails that threaten users with legal action quoting
cybersquatting laws, jail, and fines to make the average user relinquish
their rights and nothing at all is being done about this.
How about a response Vint. When is ICANN going to balance the needs of
individual users against these bullies?
Don't quote me strictly on this case. Address the overall issue. Too
expensive for small businesses and individuals to do the arbitration
process
and toom many domain names that are not "confusingly" similar to the
trademarks being decided as confusing. No one will confuse applefan.com
with
apple.com or assume it is an apple site. It is obviously a domain
registered
by someone who likes apple or that is what most would think. Same with
barbiefan.com, etc.
Also comments about reverse domain hijacking need to be addressed.
Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
http://www.articlecontentprovider.com