One interesting thing to know is whether they are located in a jurisdiction that recognizes common law rights in trademarks. Are they in a state of the US, for example?
A trademark is a word, device, or symbol which, through use in commerce in connection with particular goods or services has come to distinctively signify the source or origin of those goods and services.
In order to do that, the trademark must first be *capable* of acquiring such meaning in the minds of consumers. Other factors affecting the status of a common law trademark will be the degree of inherent distinctiveness (is it fanciful, arbitrary, or descriptive), the length of time and geographic extent of use, the amount invested in promoting the mark *as* a mark, etc. Any good primer on trademarks describes these factors, and there is no need to recycle them here.
Can they win a UDRP on a common law claim? Sure they can. UDRP panels have a very low threshold of proof for common law marks, although it is evidentially somewhat more difficult than for a registered mark.
But the story doesn't end there. There are *three* things which must be proven in a UDRP complaint, and whether or not they have a trademark claim is simply one of those three things.
Typically, if the term at issue is not facially descriptive or generic to the complainant's goods or services, then the UDRP panel will find a trademark claim, or they will "pass" on the TM issue if there is a clear respondent win on either of the other two issues.
Again, these questions always seem to be asked backwards, from the perspective of "Do these guys have a trademark?" Most of the time, that question is not as important as whether *you* had a reason for registering the domain name that is independent of any knowledge or motivation arising from whether or not they have a trademark.






Reply With Quote






Bookmarks