Back in September 2013 Indian Retail Giant TATA were found guilty of reverse domain name hijacking (croma.com) after being successfully defended by UDRP.
After months of intense negotiation, internet users who now type in the croma.com domain into their URL will be redirected to cromaretail.com.
Initially the Complainant may have believed that the UDRP would be the cheaper option for recovering the domain name; this case however proves otherwise.
Let’s consider some lessons we can learn from CROMA.COM:
Lesson 1: Domain Sales Can Be Legitimate: – ‘The offer to sell a domain name that a party otherwise has rights to is not bad faith; rather, that is nothing more than a legitimate effort to sell property properly owned by the party’. – Personally Cool Inc. v. Name Administration Inc. (BVI), FA1212001474325
Lesson 2: The UDRP Is Not The Platform For Failed Negotiations: – “…the UDRP is aimed at providing trademark owners with a remedy for abusive domain name registrations and is not an alternative strategy to obtain the compulsory transfer of domain names legitimately registered by third parties after the failure of acquisition through negotiations.’ – Albir Hills Resort, S.A. v. Telepathy, Inc; WIPO Case No. D2012-0997
Lesson 3: Defend Your Domains: – Respondent’s should ensure that if they believe their domains were registered in good faith, that they spend time and effort defending UDRP complaints filed against them.
Lesson 4: Fight for Reverse Domain Name Hijacking: – RDNH status can be more than a stamp imposed by Panels but can significantly enhance the value of a five figure domain into a six/seven figure domain; Complainant beware.