Cybersquatting...INDRP case

Ceres

New Member
The well-known fashion company Kenneth Cole Productions Inc won the domain KennethCole.in in an INDRP case. The company owns two trademarks in India effective 1997 and 2001 for the term KENNETH COLE.

The respondent registered the domain KennethCole.in in 2007.

The respondent did not file a response in this case. There was no evidence to suggest that the respondent had a legitimate commercial interest in using the term Kenneth Cole, and there was no website on the domain.

The Arbitrator stated that:

Registration of a famous trademark without legitimate commercial interests in the same is prima facie evdence that the Respondent was well aware of the reputation and goodwill attached to the Complainant's trademark/name. Thus the Respondent has registered the web site in bad faith.
Respondent's bad faith registration is evidently clear from his offer to sell the disputed domain <kennethcole.in> to the Complainant.
The respondent was also ordered to pay Rs.5,00,000 (rupees five lakhs) towards the cost of the proceedings.

I think this is the right decision by the Arbitrator as it's a blatant case of cybersquatting.

I notice KennethCole.co.in is on the pending list of INDRP cases. Different respondent but I'm guessing the complainant will also win that case. That domain was registered in 2007, it doesn't resolve to a website...sounds familiar...

Cybersquatters hurt the domain industry.

Anyone else wish to share their views on this case?
 

Ceres

New Member
I recently saw JLo won a case too
Yes, the JLo decision is not surprising.

I was thinking of registering a doman on CourtneyLove.in ;-) I will be out of the personal domain names ;-)
Hey hosting, get your wallet out and get ready to pay a costs award made against you...:p

Seriously though, I sometimes wonder if some of these people simply don't realise that registering these type of domains infringes on third party rights? What do you think?
 

skyshipper

Active Member
Country flag
Seriously though, I sometimes wonder if some of these people simply don't realise that registering these type of domains infringes on third party rights? What do you think?
Yes ,they sure do.:)
But i think something like britneyspearspictures, or JLofans is not an infringement.
britneyspears or JLo should be owned by respective parties,
surnames and first names are definitely not infinging !
So a sharapova.in or Jennifer.co.in is no infringement.
However i think it is mostly in the initial domaining endevours that most domainers reg these celebrity names!
I think once the lexicons of the domain industry are clearly spelled out, none takes reg these names very aggresively .Maybe just some reg to test traffic and make hay while the sun shines!definitely not keepers.

just some food for thought. Ash.in , just in case is challenged legally.Does the defendent get a fair trail? considering the status and icon status of the said!:)
 

Ceres

New Member
But i think something like britneyspearspictures, or JLofans is not an infringement.
If you make money from a fan site, there's a risk you could lose the domain.

If it's a non-commercial site and you make no money from it, there's less of a risk that you'll lose the domain.

So a sharapova.in or Jennifer.co.in is no infringement.
Owing domains with just a first name or surname is safer, however you still need to be careful how you use the domain.

For example, if you have a site Jennifer.co.in and it has ads on celebrity Jennifer Lopez, there's a risk you'd lose the domain as you'd be trading off the goodwill of this famous celebrity.
 

LLL.in King

Well-Known Member
Country flag
Yes, this case went as it should've. The registerant should not have registered this name initially, and he tried to sell it to Kennth Cole, which was also wrong, once the UDRP case was born. As said already, a bit of a no-brainer....same prediction for kennethcole.co.in. These cases do prove one thing i like: .in names are so valuable, people are willing to sue for them. Bad to cybersquat, good to see people fighting for good names.
 

Ceres

New Member
As expected, the respondent in the KennethCole.co.in case lost his domain. He was ordered to pay Kenneth Cole Productions Inc a sum of Rs. 25,000. The respondent did not file a response in the case.

The Arbitrator stated:

b) The panel finds that the respondent in the above matter is habitual cyber squatter and has been registering well known trade marks as the domain names. Reliance is made on case no. INDRP/82 concerning domain name armani.co.in.
INDRP/82 is the Armani.co.in case. Same respondent.

The above highlights that the tribunal will take into consideration past INDRP cases that a respondent has been involved in. While I think the Arbitrator is correct in his final decision, I think the tribunal should *not* rely on past cases of the respondent. This is because some INDRP cases have been decided unfairly! What are your views?

Here's the full decision of KennethCole.co.in.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Prashant Sharan Dow wins cybersquatting dispute against D0W .com Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Timik Group loses a cybersquatting claim against Timik.com Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan D’Agostinos Markets, Inc. files a cybersquatting case and loses it Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Gameloft gets back Asphalt 9 domains in cybersquatting cases Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Great Read!!! : Will Cybersquatting and RDNH complainants choose ACPA over UDRP ? Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Facebook will go to court against more registrars for cybersquatting Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Warner Bros. Entertainment's Cybersquatting complain couldn't fetch Dumbledore.com Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Curated.io owner sues Deal.com over cybersquatting issue Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Cybersquatting case to get SixthStreet.com Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Cybersquatting cases move up in number in 2019 at WIPO Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Oregan man found guilty of RDNH in pickleball cybersquatting case Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Lawyer thinks domain investing is “Anticipatory Cybersquatting” Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Stone Fashion Group loses a cybersquatting dispute against Beaumont.com Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan IMI.com cybersquatting trial story Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Fractal Analytics' new cybersquatting lawsuit Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Cybersquatting challenge lost by Dakota Access Pipeline operator Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan JUUL cybersquatting case is interesting Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Farrer & Co law firm couldn't win cybersquatting dispute Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Cybersquatting dispute: Overspray company Overreaches Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Clothing company loses a cybersquatting dispute Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Cybersquatting complaint against the domain demix.com(Demix)- a sports equipment company. Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan EURid strikes a trademark protection deal to reduce cybersquatting Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan EURid strikes a trademark protection deal to reduce cybersquatting Resources 0
Prashant Sharan Russian car cam company accused of cybersquatting Registrars 0
Prashant Sharan MMX wants to offer a service for trademark owners worried wrt cybersquatting Registrars 0
Prashant Sharan Sun Valley ski resort fails to defend its cybersquatting claim Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Coinbase successfully defends domain name in cybersquatting dispute Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan Sheryl Sandberg loses cybersquatting claim over LeanIn.com domain name Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan .INC Registry wants to project domains as an antidote to cybersquatting! New GTLDs 0
Prashant Sharan Bad News for Miguel Torres S.A. - loses another cybersquatting claim Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Prashant Sharan AddictingGames.com sues Addicting.com, claiming cybersquatting Legal Issues and Dispute 0
JulienJ WIPO domain name cybersquatting cases reach new record in 2017 (infographic) Legal Issues and Dispute 0
JulienJ Film director Wes Anderson gets WesAnderson.com domain name in cybersquatting dispute Legal Issues and Dispute 0
domainking131 Apple gets Reverse Domain Name Hijacking decision in cybersquatting dispute Legal Issues and Dispute 0
domainking131 Texas man sues Fortune 500 liquor company to overturn cybersquatting decision Legal Issues and Dispute 0
tulip Cybersquatting Legal Issues and Dispute 11
domainking131 Interesting data on domain growth and cybersquatting Non-Indian Domains 0
domainking131 Cybersquatting complaints against .com domains are dropping Non-Indian Domains 0
domainking131 Top 2015 new gTLD sale looks like cybersquatting New GTLDs 0
domainking131 Oscars Academy Loses Cybersquatting Battle Non-Indian Domains 0
domainking131 The Owner of .Co Site Sues .Com Owner For Cybersquatting Non-Indian Domains 0
domainking131 Philip Morris takes down gripe sites in sloppy cybersquatting decision Non-Indian Domains 0
domainking131 First example of .sucks cybersquatting? New GTLDs 0
domainking131 A lot of cybersquatting going on in new gTLDs New GTLDs 0
domainking131 Chinese registrant of .CLUB domain attempts to rationalize cybersquatting New GTLDs 0
domainking131 Donald Trump of 'The Apprentice' gets $32,000 in cybersquatting case Non-Indian Domains 0
domainking131 Why cybersquatting won't be a big deal with new TLDs?? Non-Indian Domains 0
Ceres Oscar academy files cybersquatting case Legal Issues and Dispute 2
Ceres Cybersquatting Legal Issues and Dispute 0
CyberKing TigerBrand.in will be interesting INDRP Legal Issues and Dispute 0
Similar threads


















































whois



Forums dedicated to Indian domain names, including buying, selling, appraising, developing, and monetizing.

About Us

Threads
26,313
Messages
73,164
Members
7,603
Latest member
dtphouse
Top Bottom