Lambo from namepros loses Lambo.com in a UDRP (1.Viewing)

Isn't Lambo just a slang word for the car?

I would have gotten a lawyer to defend it, just to have the best chance to keep a name like that.

shame on the 2 panelists

just read it, Neil Anthony Brown gave a good dissent as to why the complaint should have been rejected. which is the kind of argument a good domain lawyer could have come up with.

I haven’t read the thread since it’s 12 pages but as unfortunate as it is it’s pretty clear to anyone that “lambo” is shortened form of Lamborghini. Ask 10 people more than likely 10 out of 10 will tell you that.

When you have a domain like that it’s going to take quite a bit of evidence to prove to panelists that it’s not the case. Now I didn’t read the UDRP…but if the guys last name was “lambo” I can imagine it would have been much easier to defend and win the case.

So as far as I’m concerned. I am not really surprised…

part of the dissent was that even though the company has a tm on 'Lambo', they don't actually use the word for anything to do with selling the cars! so it is a trademark for a term they don't even use. they always use the full Lamborghini. in fact the point was made that the company would probably think using the term 'Lambo' in any of their marketing materials would be distasteful as opposed to the full name. so part of this is, should companies be allowed to protect terms with a trademark, when they don't even use that term for anything?

the domain owner wasn't using the domain for anything to do with the car, selling ads, etc. the domain owner's username in a domain forum was 'lambo'. the domain owner had the domain for sale, but never approached the company to sell it to them. hard to argue bad faith.

Yes, almost anyone who hears the term 'lambo' thinks of the car, but there are other uses on the name by other companies, for example check: Lambo Group Berhad What if you named your cat Lambo and used the domain for a webpage about your cat?

at first glance it might seem like an easy decision, but going strictly by the UDRP rules it isn't so clear that there was any wrongdoing, and the 2 panelists who voted for had some leaps of faith and broad assumptions in their reasoning imo. far as I can tell it was an overreach by the company.

A good domain lawyer could have made a lot of the arguments made by the dissenting panelist, and maybe even more because a domain lawyer with some history can likely pull up some old UDRP's and find some related instances to your own case that are supporting.

This is one of those UDRP's that really makes you think about the rules, and isn't so clear cut from a first look.

I can’t say that I agree to be honest. You can call your cat Microsoft doesn’t mean you have any actual rights. Lambo is such a well known term. It would be very difficult to defend. No matter what lawyer you have there’s still a good chance you could lose the domain. Unfortunately I think having a username on a forum was obviously not enough. If it was a well known nickname of yours I think at that point you would need tons of evidence.

Not sure what evidence was provided but if it was solely the username that’s pretty pathetic in my opinion.