Cybersquatting dispute against accessories seller — Tesla loses
Firm might have a trademark case, but not a cybersquatting case.
Tesla has lost a cybersquatting dispute it filed against a website that sells accessories for use in Tesla vehicles.
The firm filed a dispute against Teslaunch .net, which is based in China.
Despite the domain owner not responding to the suit, panelist Steven M. Levy, Esq, ruled that this is not a case of cybersquatting under the rules of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). There are exceptions under the policy for sites that sell products or services related to a brand.
Tesla may well have a trademark case against the site’s owner, but it’s not cybersquatting under the policy.
Levy wrote:
On balance, the Panel finds it more likely that Respondent is not a cybersquatter seeking to improperly target or capitalize on Complainant’s trademark but is, rather, a seller of accessories and parts which may be used with Tesla vehicles. When viewed against all of the circumstances of this case, Respondent’s activities here do not meet the requirements of bad faith registration and use, either under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii) (disrupting Complainant’s business as a competitor) or ¶ 4(b)(iv) (seeking commercial gain through a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s trademark). Ought to Complainant feel that Respondent is perpetrating an infringement of its rights in the TESLA trademark, a court of law would be the proper venue for addressing such dispute.
