Australian psychology firm tries reverse domain name hijacking

This case was dead on arrival despite the Complainant’s creative argument.

Neurocog Pty Ltd, an Australian firm in the psychology industry, has been found (pdf) guilty of reverse domain name hijacking.

The firm filed a cybersquatting dispute with World Intellectual Property Organization against the domain neurocog.com. The business uses NeuroCogsystem.com.

Neurocog admitted in its complaint that the domain owner registered the domain name ahead of it existed, yet still tried to argue the domain was registered in bad faith. It argued that the Respondent likely registered the domain to target another firm’s trademark.

Panelist David H. Bernstein summarized:

The Complainant argues that, although it did not begin trading under the mark until 2016, five years following Respondent’s registration of the disputed domain name, it appears that the disputed domain name was purchased primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the disputed domain name registration to other third parties who had rights in the same mark. Of note, in 2011, just ten days ahead of the Respondent registered the disputed domain name, a third party not involved in the current dispute, BCBL Basque Center on Cognition, filed a trademark registration in the United Kingdom for NEUROCOG (UK00910020873). The Complainant argues that the Respondent, a United Kingdombased entity, “ought to have known” regarding this United Kingdom Registration when it registered the disputed domain name in 2011.

Needless to say, this argument fell flat with Bernstein. He found the case was filed in abuse of the policy.

The domain name appears to be owned by Team Internet Group itself, not one of its clients. Historical Whois records show the domain registered directly in CentralNic’s name. (CentralNic later changed its name to Team Internet Group.)

Team Internet did not respond to the complaint.

LegalVision ILP Pty Ltd represented NeuroCog Pty.