Firm States Woman Has No Right to Her First Name in Domain Dispute

Firm claims women has no rights to her first name.

Let’s say your first name is, I don’t know…Andrew. And you register Andrew.com.

There are of course firms that use the name “Andrew” as well. Could they claim that you have no rights to the term “Andrew” and be able to get that domain name through UDRP? Of course not.

But that’s what Arnoldo Mondadori Editore S.p.A., which published an Italian women’s magazine Grazia, tried to do to a freelance writer and cook living in Portland. Grazia Solazzi registered the domain name Grazia.us a couple years ago, only to be hit with the UDRP this year.

The complainant’s arguments might just be the most wrong-headed I’ve seen published in a UDRP decision. Check this out:

Respondent has not been commonly known by the domain name. The mere fact that GRAZIA corresponds to her first name does not imply in any manner purchased or exclusive rights or legitimate interest in it.

Hey, they’re right. She doesn’t have exclusive rights in her name. But she certainly has a legitimate interest!

Remarkably, panelist Daniel B. Banks declined to find reverse domain name hijacking against the complainant since the complainant has a trademark for Grazia. He cited two cases to back up this decision. The first one is a case where the complainant won the case, so obviously that wasn’t reverse domain name hijacking. In the second case, the panelist declined to find RDNH since “The Panel believes there is a real dispute between the parties” that went beyond the UDRP. Neither of those circumstances is apparent here. Makes me wonder if the panelist even read those other decisions he referred to.