The domain was registered more than a decade before the Complainant existed.
An AI-powered intellectual property protection company filed a reverse domain name hijacking UDRP on behalf of a client.
MarqVision just raised a $48 million Series B round for its AI-powered IP enforcement.
The company filed a case (pdf) on behalf of Ideas On Board Corp, a Korean company that uses concreted.kr, against the domain name concreted.com.
The case was dead on arrival, as the current registrants of the domain acquired it more than a decade before the Complainant existed.
Even after the Respondent pointed this out, the Complainant attempted to submit a supplemental filing, arguing different points in its case.
World Intellectual Property Organization panelist Andrea Mondini wrote:
…given that the Complainant was established and registered its trademark many years after the Respondent registered the disputed domain name, there could not have been bad faith registration nor use in bad faith by targeting the Complainant’s trademark. That means that the Complaint was doomed to failure. This issue is not close or subject to ambiguity: both the Policy and the WIPO Overview 3.0 make it clear that bad faith only can be found if the Respondent acted in bad faith towards the Complainant and its trademark rights. Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complaint was brought in bad faith and constitutes an attempt at RDNH.
It’s somewhat surprising that the case was even filed, as the domain owner had only requested $5,900 when the Complainant inquired about purchasing the domain name.
MarqVision’s website states that its AI-powered platform “continuously monitors domains for impersonation, scans for high-risk activity, and prepares your evidence for filing.” When filing a UDRP, it states that it does so with the “full support of our legal and policy experts.”
At the same time, its terms of service state:
…the Services do not include any legal representation or initiating any legal proceedings (including making any claims or complaints to or before any court or judicial body). Customer understands and acknowledges that Marq Vision, its affiliates and its and their employees, directors, officers and representatives (collectively, the “Marq Vision Parties”) do not and cannot provide legal guidance or advice, and in no event shall the Services constitute any creation of any potential or actual attorney-client relationship…
John Berryhill, who represented the domain name owner, ran correspondence from MarqVision that requested more time to respond through an AI checker, which stated that AI generated the correspondence.
According to udrp.tools, this is the 25th cybersquatting case that MarqVision has filed on behalf of customers to be decided. It lost one other case.
Source: https://domainnamewire.com/
