Company filed baseless cybersquatting dispute at WIPO.

A New York brand strategy company that uses the domain name has been found to have engaged in reverse domain name hijacking in its attempt to get the domain name

Deep Focus Inc. filed the complaint against Abstract Holdings International, a domain name investment firm.

Abstract acquired the domain name in 2012 as part of a 1,427 domain name portfolio. The portfolio included many personal names such as,, and

Deep Focus tried to buy the domain for $2,500. Abstract countered with a $200,000 price. Deep Focus then filed the UDRP as a Plan B for acquiring the domain.

A three-member World Intellectual Property Organization ruled that Deep Focus, which was represented by the law firm Hayes, Scott, Bonino & Ellingson, LLP, filed the case in abuse of the UDRP cybersquatting policy:

In the view of the Panel, the Complainant has disclosed no reasonable grounds for believing that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name with the Complainant or its trademark THE CASSANDRA REPORT in mind or with the intention of taking unfair advantage of the Complainant’s trademark. Nor, for the reasons set out above, has it disclosed reasonable grounds for believing that the Respondent has used the disputed domain name in bad faith. On the contrary, the Panel infers on balance that the Complainant commenced the current proceeding in the hope of acquiring the disputed domain name without paying the full price legitimately demanded by the Respondent for the sale of the disputed domain name. Noting also that the Complainant is legally represented in this proceeding, the Panel finds that that (sic) the Complaint was brought in bad faith and constitutes an abuse of the administrative proceeding.

Domain name lawyer Zak Muscovitch represented Abstract Holdings International.

Source link