Domain name registration and website hosting packages at affordable rates since 1997.
January 18, 2020 21:06

You are browsing the archive for domain law.

Boca Juniors .com #UDRP : #Argentina sports club takes over 24 year old #domain name

Boca Juniors is a popular sports association in Argentina, founded in 1905. The Buenos Aires club owns trademarks for BOCA JUNIORS going back to 1983. The club operates from and the matching .com, was registered in 1996. In a UDRP filed by Club Atlético Boca Juniors Asociación Civil, Argentina, the domain was transferred […]

Read more

No #RDNH finding in #UDRP case about the #domain name is a domain registered in 2001, and last year it was dragged through the mud of the UDRP process. An Indian company, Veena Kumaravel, is a beauty salon chain with over 650 outlets in India, launched (according to Complainant) in 1991. They asserted rights to the NATURALS mark. In the ensuing UDRP they claimed […]

Read more : Two housing companies fought over this #domain in a #UDRP

The domain was registered in 1995, and in 2019 it was acquired by Yonder Global, Inc. The company is in the business of international online bookings for temporary lodging and agricultural tourism. Meanwhile, North Carolina based Yonder, Inc., offers vacation home rental services since September 13, 2011 and in 2013 they acquired the matching […]

Read more

#LunaCargo : Complainant in #UDRP skips $800 payment for costly process

The UDRP Complainant in the case involving the domain name, ignored a sales price for the domain set at $800 dollars. The price was discounted from 8,500 EUR before the UDRP was filed. LunaJets SA, Switzerland, went on filing the UDRP, which costs double as much to file, using in-house lawyers most likely. This […]

Read more

#Swiss trademark : #domain lost in #UDRP after 21 years, a domain name registered in 1998, has been lost via the UDRP process; the Respondent did not respond. When such a lack of response fails to deliver the Respondent’s angle, the fact that 21 years passed since the registration of mattered little. It appears that the BOLEX mark belongs to a Swiss camera […]

Read more

#Danish corp tries to get “casual Friday” #domain via the #UDRP process

A Danish company that somehow registered the CASUAL FRIDAY mark, tried to get the domain via the UDPR process. It’s amazing that such a generic phrase, at least in the US, is used as a trademark for goods and services. DK Company Vejle A/S, Denmark, attempted to grab this domain from an American registrant. […]

Read more

#Mixbook failed in #UDRP to get – but there’s a catch!

Mixbook filed a UDRP to get the plural version domain,, but failed. The plural version exists since 1998, and the Complainant registered their trademark in 2009. The Respondent asserted that their domain is thus much older than the registered mark, and the sole panelist, Carol Stoner, Esq., agreed there is no sign of bad […]

Read more

#Lexon .com : Aged #domain name saved from the UDRP process

The registrant of was hit with a UDRP for this 1995 domain registration. The Complainant is Lexon, France, internally represented. According to the Complaint, the Complainant is Lexon, a company incorporated in France. The Complainant sells design products in the fields of electronics, audio, travel accessories, office, and leisure. The Complainant has operated since […]

Read more

Name Administration Inc. won #UDRP against generic #domain

Frank Schilling’s Name Administration Inc. has won the UDRP filed against one of its generic domain names, The Complainant is Religare Health Insurance Company Limited, India and launched its first insurance product in June 2012, under the name “Care”. Attorney John Berryhill represented the Respondent, stating the following: The Respondent submits that the Complainant […]

Read more #UDRP decision disappoints Australian law firm

An Australian law firm filed a UDRP to get the domain The Complainant, Corrs Chambers Westgarth, is an Australian commercial law firm founded in 1841. It might be shocking to them that they lost the UDRP for a domain registered in 2001, but existing marks were registered in 2005. In this case, the Respondent […]

Read more