Nominet’s DRS proceedings commence with a decision from a single expert. If that decision is appealed, the appeal is heard by three experts sitting together. The identity of the expert and their approach in applying the DRS policy will affect the outcome of a domain name decision.
In 1994, vikingdirect.co.uk was registered by a director of a company which was in dispute with Viking Office Products, Inc, which owned the trade mark VIKING DIRECT. Viking invoked Nominet DRS proceedings after making several attempts to purchase the domain name. The original Nominet expert found that, although Viking had the requisite rights in the “Viking Direct” name, it had failed to demonstrate that the domain name was an abusive registration.
Viking appealed and argued that the registration of a domain name by a customer of a business, which contains the established trading name or registered trade mark of that business, should give rise to a presumption that such registration is abusive. The three expert appeal decided by a majority vote not to allow the appeal.
The dissenting expert was of the view that the registration of a well known (or known to the person making the application) name as a domain name called for an explanation, and that failure to provide such explanation should lead to a finding of abusive registration. Had the dissenting expert been the original expert, it is likely that the first decision would have been different.
This article first appeared in our Technology Annual Review, March 2006. To view this publication, please click here to open in a new window.
