Comments

• smlevy42 11:03 am 08-May-2017 This case provides a stark reminder that the UDRP should not be underestimated by complainants or their counsel, and that only attorneys experienced in filing such cases should be retained for this purpose. Experience with trademark disputes and litigation, in general, is often not enough. Complainant's representative lists trademarks and domain names as areas of specialization on its firm's website has even handled four UDRP cases since 2008 (three wins and one loss). However, had the complainant brought this matter to an attorney with more extensive experience, it would almost certainly have been informed of the infirmities in its case and been advised to seek another avenue for the resolution of this dispute (to the extent that one can truly characterize this as a dispute).

• UDRPcommentaries (Gerald M. Levine) 10:15 pm 12-May-2017 This case also brings up feature that distinguishes trademark and domain name law, namely that a party can register and use a domain name corresponding to a trademark (assuming the proper alignment of facts) even though it would be unable to obtain a trademark itself for the same or similar grammatical constituents.