Arbitrator States Complainant Harassed Domain Owner

Domain arbitrator states complainant brought complaint to harass domain owner but won’t find reverse domain name hijacking.

LaFrance Corporation made a dubious attempt at getting the domain name LaFrance.com and lost. But despite overwhelming weakness in its case, an arbitrator with World Intellectual Property Organization failed to find reverse domain name hijacking. Just wait until you read why.

But first, let’s consider this case.

LaFrance Corporation uses the web site lafrancecorp.com. LaFrance.com came up for sale in an online auction, but LaFrance Corporation apparently wasn’t willing to spend the $3,088 the domain name sold for. It ended up the third highest bidder.

Shortly thereafter, LaFrance Corporation filed a UDRP to get the domain name from the winner of the auction, who had by now begun developing the site. The respondent alleged that filing a UDRP was “plan B” for LaFrance Corporation to try to get the domain name.

The arbitrator mostly agreed. He stated the case “was brought primarily to harass the domain-name holder”. But he still didn’t find LaFrance Corporation guilty of reverse domain name hijacking. Why?

“Had Complainant been represented by counsel the Panel would not have hesitated to make an RDNH finding.”

I guess if you’re ignorant of the rules then you haven’t done anything wrong. Unless you’re the respondent on the losing side of a UDRP.