Paris Hilton files domain dispute

Paris Hilton, a celebrity and heiress to the Hilton fortune, has filed a dispute with the WIPO over the domain paris-hilton-perfume.net. She contends that the domain violates the “Paris Hilton” trademark.

This dispute was more than likely filed by one of Paris Hilton’s legal representatives. This is a good thing, as the star has often been a subject of ridicule for her lack of intelligence. The name is owned by Troy Rushton, who registered it on March 31, 2010. I don’t think he has much of a case to defend his use of the name and the registrant will probably lose the dispute.

On a side note, Hilton was briefly detained at a Corsica airport this weekend for possession of cannabis.

Photo | Flickr

French publisher loses domain dispute

Usually big companies win domain disputes. In this instance, however, French publisher Editions Milan tried to abuse the WIPO domain arbitration system and ended up screwing itself over in the process.

It all started when American soldier Steve Hill registered kokeshi.com in 2001. He registered the single-keyword domain because of his interest in Japanese kokeshi dolls. In 2009, Editions Milan began publishing a series of children’s books called ‘Kokeshi.’

You can probably see by now where this is going. The French company wanted the domain. Although it does own the trademark to ‘Kokeshi,’ the mark only applies to books and CDs. After Hill refused the company’s $1,500 offer to buy the name, the publisher filed a dispute with the WIPO.

Pointing out that the firm’s trademark did not extend to his doll-related domain and that the company cannot monopolize generic words, the WIPO ruled in favor of the American serviceman. Adding insult to injury, the arbitrator declared the company guilty of reverse domain hijacking for its abusive behavior.

It’s always nice to see the little guy win. You can read the full case documents here.

Source | DN Journal
Photo | Flickr

Facebook initiates dispute over Facebook.me

Facebook has filed a dispute with the WIPO over the domain Facebook.me, which is currently owned by UAE citizen Amjad Abbas. This is just one of many ccTLDs the site has gone after lately.

Interestingly, the name’s current owner has it redirecting to Facebook.com. Why he would do is unclear to me. It just emphasizes the fact that he is infringing on the company’s trademark. Maybe Abbas thought Facebook wouldn’t pursue a case against him if he redirected the name to the social networking site?

Either way, the registrant will very likely lose this dispute.

Chanel sweeps up five domains in dispute

French fashion house Chanel has won a dispute filed with the WIPO covering five domains: chanelbagsale.com, chanelbageshop.com, chanelhandbags.org, chanel-sale.com, and chanelsale.net.

Naturally, the company contended that the names violated its trademark and were being used in bad faith. The registrant failed to respond to these allegations.

Personally, I don’t even think these names are “chic” enough for Chanel. Would anyone honestly believe such a recognized name would legitimately use chanelhandbags.org? I doubt there was any consumer confusion here. But maybe Chanel was more concerned that the domains could be used to sell counterfeit products.

Source | Domain News
Photo | Flickr

WIPO: Football makes up large number of domain cases

According to the WIPO, it heard some 2,107 complaints on 4,688 domains in 2009. What is more interesting, however, is that a large number of these complaints involved football domains.

“Football featured strongly in the WIPO Centre’s 2009 caseload, including the upcoming World Cup,” the WIPO said. One of the more notable domains disputed includes www.fifaworldcup2010.com. EPL teams Fulham, Liverpool, Manchester United, Tottenham and West Ham all brought cases against registrants last year.

Although the number of domain disputes filed with the organisation, the number of domains involved in arbitration has actually risen by 18.5% since 2008.

Mastercard wins dispute involving mastercard-brasil.com

MasterCard has won a domain dispute filed with the WIPO involving the domain mastercard-brasil.com.The name has been taken from Pattishall McAuliffe, the registrant, and transferred to the firm.

In its complaint, MasterCard claimed the name violated its trademark and that the registrant was using it to collect the personal information of customers who had actually intended to visit the real MasterCard site.

It’s clear that the domain violates MasterCard’s trademark, but I doubt that McAuliffe was collecting personal information because according to the case documents, the name was inactive. How can you collect information from a domain without a website?

Photo | Flickr

WIPO rules against cybersquatter

In yet another domain dispute victory for Google, the WIPO has ruled against a cybersquatter and in favour of theMountain View company in a case involving the domain googlenetbiz.com.

As is generally the norm, Google contended that the domain violated its trademark and that it was being used in bad faith. The registrant, an Indian national by the name of Racha Ravinder, might have been able to put up some form of defense. He put the nail in the coffin with his response to the complaint, however, stating, “I will sell my domain googlenetbiz.com for USD 50,000 only, do you buy it.”

By submitting this statement, Ravinder unknowing committed cybersquatting. If the WIPO didn’t have a reason to hand the name over before his response, it did after.

Source | Express India
Photo | Flickr

Cybersquatting may be on the decline

Data collected from a number of arbitration panels, including the WIPO and National Arbitration Forum, show that cybersquatting may be on the decline. Last year saw a 9% decline in the number of cybersquatting cases filed overall, a three-year low.

Unfortunately, this decrease does not necessarily mean the number of cybersquatters has gone down. Instead, complainants are saving money by filing for multiple domains at once. The actual number of domains disputed before panels has actually increased.

According to the WIPO and NAF, 90% of cases last year were decided in favour of the complainant.

Lacoste wins lacostebuy.com

Clothing retailer Lacoste won the domain lacostebuy.com in a recent dispute it filed with the WIPO. The name was used by a Chinese citizen, Liu Dong Ping, to sell counterfeit merchandise.

For this reason and because of trademark infringement, Lacoste requested that it be given ownership of the name. In light of this evidence and the failure of the registrant to respond to the complaint, the arbitration panel ruled in favour of the clothing company. Trademark infringers just can’t win these days, can they?

Source | Domain News
Photo | Flickr

Domain name arbitration

Coca-Cola has won rockncoke.net in a domain name arbitration case at the WIPO. The beverage company claimed the domain was confusing similar to its trademark and used in bad faith.

The panel responsible for the ruling also believes that the registrant intended to sell the name to Coca-Cola and turn a profit. This is a clear-cut case of cybersquatting.

Rock’n Coke is a music festival sponsored by Coca-Cola held every summer in Istanbul, Turkey. Performer’s at this year’s event included Linkin Park, Kaiser Chiefs, and Nine Inch Nails.

Photo | Flickr