UDRP

Why the ekart.com UDRP decision was correctly decided

WIPO panelist Steven A. Maier was the panelist who decided the UDRP complain inInstakart Services Private Limited v. Ozguc Bayraktar, RS DANISMANLIKCase No. D2024-4345 Key Reasons why the ekart.com UDRP decision was correctly decided: 1. Chronological Impossibility:– Domain registered: December 29, 1999– Complainant’s operations began: 2009– Trademark registrations: November 7, 2012– Impossible for Respondent to […]

UDRP

2024 UDRP re: powerhome.com: Why Power Home Remodeling Lost Its Domain Name Battle

The recent POWER HOME REMODELING vs. powerhome.com UDRP decision offers a masterclass in domain name dispute resolution. Let’s break down why this corporate giant’s attempt to grab a valuable domain name failed. Dictionary Words Aren’t Your Private Property First lesson: You can’t monopolize common words. “Power” and “home” are everyday terms, and their combination makes

UDRP

Overreaching UDRP Complaint in abnormal.ai: A Lesson in Domain Name Disputes

The recent UDRP complaint filed by Abnormal Security Corporation over the domain name abnormal.ai highlights the pitfalls of pursuing weak trademark claims in the domain name space. This case serves as a cautionary tale for companies considering similar actions, especially when dealing with common dictionary words. Facts in the abnormal.ai complaint Flawed UDRP Foundation: Abnormal

UDRP

thelsatgenius.com LSAT Tutoring Domain Prevails in UDRP Decision

In a June 2024 UDRP decision (Case No. FA2405002098364), the domain name thelsatgenius.com was successfully defended against a complaint filed by the Law School Admission Council, Inc. (LSAC). This case offers valuable insights into fair use of trademarks in domain names, particularly in educational contexts. The Parties: Key thelsatgenius.com UDRP Facts: The thelsatgenius.com UDRP Decision:

UDRP

Key Takeaways from the PROIBS.com UDRP Decision

In a recent UDRP decision (Case No. D2024-1579), the domain name was at the center of a dispute between Calmino group AB (the Complainant) and Domain Administrator, DomainMarket.com (the Respondent). This case offers valuable insights into how domain investors can successfully defend against UDRP complaints. The PROIBS.com UDRP Parties: Key Facts in the PROIBS.com case:

UDRP

snapchatapk.me UDRP Decision

DECISION Snap Inc. v. Nasir Zaman Claim Number: FA2405002096114 PARTIES Complainant is Snap Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Dennis L. Wilson of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, California, USA  Respondent is Nasir Zaman (“Respondent”), Pakistan. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <snapchatapk.me> (‘the Domain Name’), registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC. PANEL The undersigned certifies that they have acted independently and impartially and to the best of their knowledge have no known conflict in

UDRP

lsatdoctor.com UDRP Decision

DECISION Law School Admission Council, Inc. v. Vandalay Media / sean matthews Claim Number: FA2405002096289 PARTIES Complainant is Law School Admission Council, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Wendy K. Marsh of Nyemaster Goode, P.C., Iowa, USA. Respondent is Vandalay Media / sean matthews (“Respondent”), Florida, USA REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES  The domain names at issue are <lsatdoctor.com>, <lsat911.org> and <lsatdr.com> (“Domain Names”), registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and Network Solutions, LLC. PANEL The undersigned certifies

UDRP

A Dubious Decision on LSATexperts.com?

Despite the different logo on the LSATExperts.com, the UDRP panelist accepted the allegation that the domain name was used in some phishing campaign to secure LSAT user’s credentials. UDRP ruling fails to disclose any details about the alleged phishing campaign and that’s raising questions because allegations of phishing imply fraudulent criminal activities. While UDRP cases

UDRP

LSATexerts.com UDRP Decision in Claim Number: FA2405002096201

DECISION Law School Admission Council, Inc. v. CALLED Inc Claim Number: FA2405002096201 PARTIES Complainant is Law School Admission Council, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Wendy K. Marsh of Nyemaster Goode, P.C., Iowa, USA. Respondent is CALLED Inc (“Respondent”), Florida, USA. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <lsatexperts.com> (‘the Domain Name’), registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC. PANEL The undersigned certifies that they have acted independently and impartially and to the best of their knowledge

Scroll to Top