About the blog

This blog mainly created for My Cyber law’s assignment, to discuss cyber law cases which happen in Malaysia based on personal opinions, comments and critiques. Those contents, comments and materials posted are for assignment purposes only without profit research, and do not consist any intentionally and bad faith to hurt any parties who may involve, suffer or sensitive to the cases. For those author who is involve in the articles posted, if you found any copyright issue, infringement, please contact me and I shall remove them. Any comments reported as violation, owner of the blog has the right to remove them. Please ignore the date published as the date is just use for softing purposes.

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Post 12: Cybersquatting and Cases

Since domain name is given or registered in first come first serve basis, conflict can be easily occur when one desire domain name is taken by other.

Cybersquatting occur when a owner registered a domain name which consist other owner registered trademark and sell it to the owner for profit purposes.

Cybersquatting case 1: Madonna vs Parisi


"A pornographer who has registered hundreds of domain names could lose one of the biggest gems in his collection: Madonna.com. ..."

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-244734.html#ixzz1J9FeBUMN

Complainant: Madonna
Respondent: Dan Parisi

Parisi, who operates adult entertainment site Whitehouse.com purchased Madonna.com in 1998 for $20'000 from a bulk domain name registrar. However, Madonna who runs her own site at Madonnafanclub.com, has filled a complaint with WIPO to reclaim Madonna.com.

In order to win the arbitration, Madonna has to prove that Parisi register the domain name
  1. the Trademark is belong to the complainant
  2. the Trademark infringement is confusing public
  3. that the respondent has no legitimate interests in respect of the domain name (fair use), and
  4. the domain name had been registered and used in bad faith
On the other hand, if Parisi want to win the arbitration, then he has to prove that
  1. good reason for the selection of Madonna as a domain name
  2. is not confusing public
  3. used in good faith

Decision: Favor fall on complainant, the domain name should be tranferred to the complainant.

Reason:
Madonna had registered her name Madonna as her trademark for entertainment services and related goods since 1979. Hence the domain name registered by respondent Parisi is definitely trademark infringement where it confusing public and misleading consumers into thinking the site is somehow related to Madonna.

Pasiri also failed to provide the panel with a resonable explanation why he chose Madonna as a domain name. Furthermore, the registered domain name is also found used in bad faith where Parisi used the address with the intent to attract Internet users to a pornographic Web site.


Cybersquatting Case 2: Nikon Sdn Bhd vs First Web Enterprise
Posted by at

1 comment:

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)