One of the WIPO decisions published today relates to gillette.ro.
The registrant (respondent) didn't make any submissions in their defence, so the decision could have been quite banal.
However some of the panelist's comments under the "Registered and Used in Bad Faith" section are quite interesting under:
The Panel disagrees with the Complainant's submission that the only conclusion that can be drawn from the registration of a domain name consisting of a well-known trade mark such as the Complainant's GILLETTE trade mark and the history of the Respondent's similar conduct in respect of other well-known trade marks is that the Respondent registered the Domain Name in the hope of obtaining financial compensation from the rightful trade mark owner.
It appears to the Panel that while this is definitely a possibility, such an intention cannot simply be assumed in the circumstances as the Complainant has not adduced any evidence as to the Respondent's offer for sale or other attempt at reaping financial benefits through registration of the Domain Name. The Panel notes that the Domain Name is not in use, and does not resolve to any page which would suggest that the Domain Name is for sale.
Put in simpler English. You can't just make assumptions. You need to provide evidence.
Ultimately the case was won by Gillette, but the "assumptions without evidence" are an interesting sidenote.
|Cybersquatting||Policy & Regulation|
|DNS Security||Registry Services|
|IP Addressing||White Space|
Neustar DDoS Protection
Neustar DNS Services
Minds + Machines