The shameful WIPO case of Aspis.com

[Theo]

I just came across this WIPO case with regards to the domain name Aspis.com

It would have been a typical case, if it weren't for the fact that I actually visited the web site back in 1998 when it was registered; its purpose has always been to gripe against Aspis Pronoia, an insurance company in Greece.

Not only does the .com registration predate the complainant's Swedish mark by 8 years, it's also a generic, dictionary, ancient Greek word that means "shield".

So some Swedish meatball comes to claim a mark that's three thousand years old, and only one of the 3 panelists - Mr. G. Gervaise Davis III - had the guts to engage full vision, unlike the other two panelists.

Indeed, it's alarming to see that the WIPO system is far from flawless and that there is no fair and balanced measure of what constitutes "legitimate use" and "bad faith".

 

[schepperer]

This decision is a joke like may others before. Criticism as bad faith? Aspis as greek word.

1. Its just usual you never do harm to the guys who pay you.
2. Academics prove that referees decide in favour of home teams.
3. Snakes do not bite their own tails.

"Knud Wallberg was head of the trade mark department of the Danish Patent and Trade Mark Office for more than 7 years"

See also his air france sucks decision.

http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_roo...cles/WIPO Rule In Favour Of Air France In.htm

 

[Theo]

Interesting. So do you think that the WIPO panelist consortium has been infiltrated by individuals with strong ties to the corporate trademark world?

 

[katherine]

See also his air france sucks decision.

http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_roo...cles/WIPO Rule In Favour Of Air France In.htm

It's another WIPO starring Rick S. :yes:
He still owns quite a few [company]sucks.com domains, that are parked so freedom of speech is poor defense

 

[Theo]

Let me give you some background info about the Aspis.com case.

Back in 1998, the Greek Internet was an enclosure that consisted of one main pipeline that fed the country with 2.5 Mbps access, via Forthnet - the latter being a research facility at the University of Crete. Most Greeks used the net to connect to local web sites and portals or BBS's (Compulink, HOL, Internet Hellas, Acropolis Net etc). The connecting bandwidth for the entire userbase was 1/4 of a typical home cable connection in the US today! You can imagine the slow modem speeds when trying to access web sites outside of Greece. So it was extremely rare to register .com domains and those that did it were students or residents outside of Greece, such as the guys behind Neon Network that own Aspis.com. In that sense they were domain pioneers, having started in the early and mid-90's. The panel's decision is despicable; simply because the domain was used continuously, for whatever lawful purpose, since 1998. It had no pretty pages, no drop-down menus and no updates for a decade. Does this make it a non-legit property? If I maintain my house and keep it under lock and key, unoccupied for 10 years but I still trim the yard and bushes and still pay my mortgage, is the State allowed to take it away from me?

Ridiculous. I can't believe how the Neon Network guys feel at this point, much like Elequa and LH.com

 

[jberryhill]

I can't believe how the Neon Network guys feel at this point

I gather you didn't check the whois data on the domain name.

Suit proceeding in Arizona...

 

[Theo]

John, that was the baffling part; that the domain still resolves as before and WHOIS stands the same. So it's an ongoing case outside of the WIPO hands?

 

[Dave Zan]

I just read the decision like 3x, and I'm still scratching my head how the other
2 could possibly find against the respondent. What am I missing?

Anyway, good luck with the suit, John.

 

[EnricoSchaefer]

It is hard to imagine anyone being confused after landing at the site. No one would think it was owned, sponsored or endorsed by any trademark holder. It is clearly a gripe site. Unfortunately it is in court, but my bet is that the registrant will win under the full protection of the First Amendment right to gripe.

 

[jberryhill]

So it's an ongoing case outside of the WIPO hands?

That is correct.

Enrico, the real laugh line in the majority decision is where they say they are not going to "import local law" in the UDRP?

Oh, really? I'd love to ask that guy where the complainant's trademark rights come from in every UDRP proceeding.

What a load of BS. The Panel is supposed to consider the Respondent's "Legitimate Rights or Interests" but the Respondent has no source of "rights" on which to rely. It's insane. Do they mean to say there is some independent set of "rights" that WIPO granted me when I was born?

I am amazed at legal "experts" who do not seem to grasp the main points of civilized existence that we've spent about 400 years trying to figure out since the Magna Carta.

...won't import local law in consideration of the RESPONDENT'S rights, is what he meant to say. Fascist nutjob.

 

[Theo]

I'm sure Dimitri can afford and *will* fight this one tooth and nail, "Leonidas" style

 

[jberryhill]

I'm sure Dimitri can afford and *will* fight this one tooth and nail

One does not stand in the way of a determined Greek.

The only thing more foolhardy than that is to try to get between two Greeks having a dispute.

It will be, no doubt.... Homeric:

http://domains.adrforum.com/domains/decisions/823027.htm

 

[Theo]

John, thanks for the laugh I own the .org so I guess I'm safe

 

[flamewalker]

Further, the term “homeric” appears purely generic and descriptive of the contents of Respondent’s planned and other related websites.

DING! Another good one for JB!

I am really glad that the owner can (and sad that he has to) spend money in the courts to overturn this horrendous decision... Hope he wins... for everyone's sake.

 

[INVIGOR]

That's just messed up... I got a case now that's an Italian surname. I was sure we had a good case till I see crap like this. I believe, John correct me if I'm wrong, but after a WIPO decision, you have like 10 days or something like that to file in federal court. Can you elaborate on that John? Thanks..

 

[flamewalker]

I'm pretty sure there is no limitation to litigate in court after a UDRP... UDRP has no effect on the court per se.

 

[Irish31]

Cases like this make me really scared to sink too much money into .Com. Some of these rulings are akin to a bully running up and beating the snot out of you and taking your lunch, simply because he is bigger.

 

[jberryhill]

I'm pretty sure there is no limitation to litigate in court after a UDRP...

It depends on whom you are talking about filing suit, and what they want to accomplish.

The UDRP requires that the Complainant identify a jurisdiction to which the Complainant will submit to any suit challenging the UDRP decision. The Complainant must choose either the registrar's jurisdiction or the registrant's jurisdiction. It's written in the complaint.

The UDRP further requires the registrar to implement the decision unless that registrar, within 10 days after the UDRP decision, receives notice of a suit filed in the jurisdiction chosen in the Complaint.

So, if you are talking about a losing UDRP respondent who wants to prevent transfer of the domain name then THAT suit has to be filed in the specified jurisdiction within 10 days of the UDRP decision.

That requirement is not a bar to a losing UDRP respondent filing a later suit elsewhere, so long as the Complainant is subject to suit there on the issue, in order to seek the same sort of declaration and to have the domain name returned to it.

Now, if you are talking about the Complainant... there is no binding effect of a UDRP decision. A losing Complainant can file anywhere they could have filed prior to the UDRP dispute, to seek transfer of the domain name notwithstanding the UDRP decision. Even if the complainant wins the UDRP dispute, the Complainant can still seek monetary damages in court against the Respondent (as can a winning Respondent).

 

[flamewalker]

So that's where the 10 days comes in, is to prevent/delay transfer after a loss to a UDRP. Good to know!

 

[jberryhill]

So that's where the 10 days comes in

The UDRP is a pretty quick read:

http://www.icann.org/udrp/udrp-policy-24oct99.htm

If an Administrative Panel decides that your domain name registration should be canceled or transferred, we will wait ten (10) business days (as observed in the location of our principal office) after we are informed by the applicable Provider of the Administrative Panel's decision before implementing that decision. We will then implement the decision unless we have received from you during that ten (10) business day period official documentation (such as a copy of a complaint, file-stamped by the clerk of the court) that you have commenced a lawsuit against the complainant in a jurisdiction to which the complainant has submitted under Paragraph 3(b)(xiii) of the Rules of Procedure.