UDRP Restrictions On Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Paragraph 15(e) of the UDRP Rules defines reverse domain name hijacking as the filing of a complaint in bad faith, resulting in the abuse of the UDRP administrative process. It becomes difficult to objectively quantify what constitutes subjective “bad faith,” resulting in panels often viewing parties’ factual discrepancies as indeterminable or immaterial at best. Therefore, despite its express recognition in the UDRP, reverse domain name hijacking findings are rare and based heavily on the factual circumstances surrounding each case.
In particular, WIPO panels generally find instances of reverse domain name hijacking where the complaint fails to establish that the respondent acted in bad faith, that the complainant regularly asserted its domain name rights, or that the primary purpose of the proceeding is to harass the domain name holder.
Examples of such findings include the following WIPO cases: Webpass, Inc. v. Paul Breitenbach (2010), Urban Logic, Inc. v. Urban Logic, Peter Holland (2009), David Robinson v. Brendan (2008), Decal v. Gregory Ricks (2008), Hero v. The Heroic Sandwich (2008), Poker Host Inc. v. Russ “Dutch” Boyd (2008), FCC Fomento de Construcciones y Contratas v “FCC.COM” (2007), Liquid Nutrition v. liquidnutrition.com (2007), Rohl, LLC v. ROHL SA (2006), and Deutsche Welle v. DiamondWare (2000).
Although UDRP panelists currently have no tools by which to punish abuses such as Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, such a finding might be used in a local jurisdiction where such abuses might constitute a tort such as tortious interference with contract or an unfair business practice.
Read more about this topic: Reverse Domain Hijacking
Famous quotes containing the words reverse and/or domain:
“We came home from the ridotto so late, or rather so early, that it was not possible for me to write. Indeed we did not go ... till past eleven o’clock: but nobody does. A terrible reverse of the order of nature! We sleep with the sun, and wake with the moon.”
—Frances Burney (1752–1840)
“When it had long since outgrown his purely medical implications and become a world movement which penetrated into every field of science and every domain of the intellect: literature, the history of art, religion and prehistory; mythology, folklore, pedagogy, and what not.”
—Thomas Mann (1875–1955)