Celgene loses a UDRP with RDNH;files a Lawsuit

Discussion in 'Legal Issues and Dispute' started by Prashant Sharan, Jun 1, 2019.

  1. Prashant Sharan

    Prashant Sharan India Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2018
    Messages:
    853
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    India
    In February of this year, I wrote about Celgene’s UDRP filing against the CellGene.com domain name. The three member WIPO UDRP panel not only ruled against Celgene, but the panel found that the UDRP was a case of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH). The domain registrant was permitted to keep the domain name.

    Following this UDRP loss, Celgene has apparently filed a cybersquatting lawsuit, according to Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review. Here’s what the publication wrote about the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) lawsuit filed by Celgene:

    “In the suit, filed at the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia yesterday, May 29, Celgene claimed that cellgene.com was an example of “typosquatting” or “cybersquatting”, a process where a domain name is created with a typographical error to closely imitate a more reputable website.”

    I believe the requirements to prove cybersquatting in a ACPA lawsuit are different than the UDRP requirements. I am not sure if the UDRP / RDNH decision will have any sort of impact on this federal lawsuit.

    Read the full post here