Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 FEBRUARY 2020

UDRP Not A Means For Contractual Enforcement

In a recent decision under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) before the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), a UDRP panel denied a UDRP...

FranceLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
David Taylor
David Taylor

In a recent decision under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) before the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), a UDRP panel denied a UDRP complaint for the disputed domain name feev.com, finding the dispute to be wholly unsuitable for determination under the UDRP, and entering a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH).

Background

The Complainant, Feev Holding B.V, was a Dutch company providing Internet and IT services, including fintech and cryptocurrency services.  For use in connection with its services, the Complainant owned the Benelux trade mark, FEEV, registered on 1 October 2019. 

The Respondent was Firas Dabboussi, FeeV, of the United States.  The disputed domain name was registered on 22 February 2002.  At the time of the decision, the disputed domain name did not resolve to an active website.   

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from