*Note* this decision is currently removed from the INRegistry website. I don't know why. However, you can view the attached copy which I happen to make. The complainant, Pantaloon Retail (India) Ltd, was successful in their INDRP case involving the domain all.in. Pantaloon owns many brand stores in India, one of which is called aLL (offering plus size clothing). It also owns a trademark for "aLL" - I assume the trademark is used in association with clothing (this information is not provided). According to the Whois, the domain was registered on 16 February 2005. I don't know when Pantaloon obtained their aLL trademark (this information is not provided). The first thing you'll notice is that the term "all" is a generic term. The Arbitrator stated: The respondent stated it was intending to set up a shopping portal that would assist Indian netizens and regular shoppers to make more informed decisions, by discovering and reviewing various aspects of products prior to purchase. It's not clear to me if the website had already been set up or not (this information is not provided). In my opinion, not enough details were provided in this decision. I find it hard to ascertain the full facts of the case. What does everyone else think? Do you agree that the case details are too vague? Coincidently, today I came across the Arbitrator's website, which you can find here.