The Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) has a pretty clear set of goals. It is primarily meant to prevent cybersquatting. To this end, it is commonly used to gain control of domains registered simply for the purpose of selling them to the trademark owner.
Also, a competitor is not allowed to register a domain to gain business by confusing customers who actually wanted a different company's website. Competitors also can not ruin a company's reputation by pretending to be that company. Note that this does not mean that trademark holders can never be criticized. It simply means you can't tarnish their image by doing disreputable things in their name.
It is easy to see that I am not trying to mislead anyone here. I am obviously not SelectQuote Insurance Services. I am running a website critical of SelectQuote Insurance Services. Then, for what reason did SelectQuote bring a complaint against this website?
This showcases the character of the company I am writing about. It is very clear that I am not a competitor, and I did not register this to me to sell it to them. But SelectQuote is not a company that allows the truth to stand in its way. They apparently feel truth is for those without the money for high-powered lawyers. You might bear this in mind as you evaluate the honesty of everyone involved.
They can spend more on lawyers. Indeed, their lawyers are quite experienced in domain disputes. SelectQuote doesn't like what I have to say, and feels they can outspend me to pervert the intent of the UDRP. It is very clear that their claim cannot win on its merits if the sides were evenly matched. Also, I cannot afford the additional fee for a three member arbitration panel, and decisions in single member panels overwhelmingly favor the complainant.
Their lawyers specialize in the sort of case. Everything favors them, except the clear facts of the case. So, this is a somewhat interesting in case. It asks the question, "Is it ever possible for a non-lawyer to prevail in a domain dispute?" I will keep you updated as to the answer.
Also, a competitor is not allowed to register a domain to gain business by confusing customers who actually wanted a different company's website. Competitors also can not ruin a company's reputation by pretending to be that company. Note that this does not mean that trademark holders can never be criticized. It simply means you can't tarnish their image by doing disreputable things in their name.
It is easy to see that I am not trying to mislead anyone here. I am obviously not SelectQuote Insurance Services. I am running a website critical of SelectQuote Insurance Services. Then, for what reason did SelectQuote bring a complaint against this website?
This showcases the character of the company I am writing about. It is very clear that I am not a competitor, and I did not register this to me to sell it to them. But SelectQuote is not a company that allows the truth to stand in its way. They apparently feel truth is for those without the money for high-powered lawyers. You might bear this in mind as you evaluate the honesty of everyone involved.
They can spend more on lawyers. Indeed, their lawyers are quite experienced in domain disputes. SelectQuote doesn't like what I have to say, and feels they can outspend me to pervert the intent of the UDRP. It is very clear that their claim cannot win on its merits if the sides were evenly matched. Also, I cannot afford the additional fee for a three member arbitration panel, and decisions in single member panels overwhelmingly favor the complainant.
Their lawyers specialize in the sort of case. Everything favors them, except the clear facts of the case. So, this is a somewhat interesting in case. It asks the question, "Is it ever possible for a non-lawyer to prevail in a domain dispute?" I will keep you updated as to the answer.
Post a Comment