Tucows RDNH win against Australian Firm (1.Viewing)

  • Topic Starter Topic Starter Esdiel
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies: Replies 8
  • Views Views: Views 1,596

Esdiel

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2020
Topics
135
Posts
1,196
Likes
1,009
Country flag
"Tucows gets Reverse Domain Name Hijacking win against Australian Firm"

Link to the story: https://domainnamewire.com/2021/06/...n-name-hijacking-win-against-australian-firm/

Further below is a link to the actual decision, and here's an excerpt where they cover the RDNH aspect:

In the present matter, the Panel finds that the Complainant should have known at the time that it filed the Complaint that it could not prove one of the essential elements required, as it is clear that the Respondent registered the Domain Name before the Complainant filed and registered the Trademark.

Furthermore, the Panel also finds that the Complainant (or rather, its professional representative) has either been extremely careless, or has tried to mislead the Panel by 1) suggesting that the Domain Name was not being used at all, 2) not disclosing accurately the status of the United States trademark application and 3) not disclosing that the Complainant sought to purchase the Domain Name rather than the Respondent offering the Domain Name for out-of-pocket expenses.

Decision: https://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/damstra.pdf
 
Question here...

With Tucows being a registrar how does the domain lock once it is in dispute?
Do they take Tucows word for it or does it temporarily have to be transferred to a different neutral registrar?

If not, maybe it is a legitimate question that needs to be addressed.
For the rest of us the domain in dispute automatically locks until the dispute is resolved.

Is there a double standard there?


[notify]FM[/notify] or [notify]GeorgeK[/notify] might be able to answer this one.

For me, I am just curious and it got me wondering.
 
The lock doesn't prevent the domain from being used, so I would believe that Tucows follows the process, no matter if it is their domain or not, otherwise, they would be risking their accreditation.

https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/udrp-rules-2015-03-11-en

The provider = dispute arbitration company

a) The Provider shall submit a verification request to the Registrar. The verification request will include a request to Lock the domain name.

(b) Within two (2) business days of receiving the Provider's verification request, the Registrar shall provide the information requested in the verification request and confirm that a Lock of the domain name has been applied. The Registrar shall not notify the Respondent of the proceeding until the Lock status has been applied. The Lock shall remain in place through the remaining Pendency of the UDRP proceeding. Any updates to the Respondent's data, such as through the result of a request by a privacy or proxy provider to reveal the underlying customer data, must be made before the two (2) business day period concludes or before the Registrar verifies the information requested and confirms the Lock to the UDRP Provider, whichever occurs first. Any modification(s) of the Respondent's data following the two (2) business day period may be addressed by the Panel in its decision.
 

Sponsors who contribute to keep dn.ca free for everyone.

Sponsors who contribute to keep dn.ca free.

Members who recently read this topic: 1

Back
Top Bottom