KERING of Paris, France just won a proceeding under the Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) policy to get the domain name PPR.Wang Suspended
Mr. Sebastian Matthew White Hughes, was the Examiner who found that KERING owned a trademark on the term “PPR”
The problem I have with this decision is that the Examiner didn’t take the time to mention where the trademark was granted, what is was granted for or when the trademark was granted and obviously PPR is a very generic term.
In The US alone there are 9 live trademarks for the term “PPR” 5 are owned by the Complainant here but 4 are not.
Moreover since its a French company and an Chinese registrant, I wonder if the person in China who registered the domain was even aware of the trademark.
So what conduct did the registrant engage in to cause the suspension, well they did not park the domain.
They just “made no use to date of the registered domain name.”
“Respondent claims Respondent registered the domain name for the purpose of selling PPR pipes in China.
Respondent supports this assertion by exhibiting examples of Internet search results for “PPR” using the Baidu search engine.
Yet Respondent has not provided any evidence to show that it is engaged in, or intends to engage in, the business of selling PPR pipes in China.”
A search of the PPR in Google returns a couple of results for Kering but also returns just as many results for Fantasy Football Leagues.
It may have been the proper result but a sloppy opinion especially considering the generic nature of the three letters, the other uses for the term and that there are other trademarks for the term and that this case was filed as a URS not a UDRP.
PPR isn’t IBM.
Yet another crap decision. What I particularly take issue with is the no use equating to bad faith. Let’s say I am a new company wanting to start a new business and I register a domain in readiness, MUST I therefore “use” the domain for “something” (anything) ,and by when ,to avoid being classed as having registered in bad faith ?. That is a wholly ludicrous position because many companies/users want to register the name prior to being ready to launch and that may be a year or so before launch. I bet if say IBM regged “a” domain for a planned new business and did’nt use the domain for a year and I took a UDRP they would not say IBM had regged/using in bad faith. Its all twisted and bent as are many decisions. On a better note, I just heard some good news from my own Court battles so yet again shows not to roll over and fight your corner, HARD. Next time as soon as someone threatens a UDRP I shall be in the Court door next day issuing proceedings BEFORE udrp is even issued.
I am wondering what decision they will make if THE “nyc” trademark holder complains about .nyc?