X hits on this document

23 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

10 / 10

The Panel considers that the Complainant  could not realistically have expected that having known of, condoned and encouraged the use of the disputed domain name by the Respondent for more than three years it could then allege that the Respondent had no legitimate right or interest in that domain name.  Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complainant’s filing of its Complaint constitutes Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. 

7.Decision

For the foregoing reasons, the Panel decides that:

(a)the domain name <ntmailserver.com> is not identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;

(b)the Respondent has a legitimate right or interest in respect of the domain name <ntmailserver.com>;

(c)

the domain name <ntmailserver.com> was not registered or used in bad faith.

(d)

The Complainant's filing of its Complaint constitutes Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

Accordingly, the Panel refuses to order that the disputed domain name <ntmailserver.com> be transferred to the Complainant.

______________________________

Andrew Brown

Presiding Panelist

____________________________________________________________

David TathamJordan Weinstein

PanelistPanelist

Dated: June 24, 2002

page 10

Document info
Document views23
Page views23
Page last viewedWed Dec 07 09:24:55 UTC 2016
Pages10
Paragraphs135
Words4094

Comments