Victory for a Respondent in a “.sucks” dispute!

[LawyerSturgeon]

A student has prevailed over a college in a UDRP dispute over FULLSAILSUCKS.COM. Full Sail is a Florida college which my client criticized on FULLSAILSUCKS.COM.

The three member UDRP panel found that the site provided bona fide non-commercial commentary about the school – and that bad faith had not been proven by the complainant.

The UDRP decision will be published in a few days, but if anyone would like to have a copy of the decision now, please let me know.

There is hope for free speech !

Stephen H. Sturgeon, Esquire
DomainNameDisputeLawyers.com

 

[GeorgeKGeorgeK is verified member.]

Good work, Steve! Was it WIPO, or NAF?

(I'm on the mailing list for WIPO decisions, but not sure there's a mailing list for NAF decisions)

 

[LawyerSturgeon]

Thanks

It is WIPO.

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

Congrats!

 

[darrenl]

He should be able to voice his opinion in America.

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

Must a 'sucks' site be advertisement free to enjoy such protection?

 

[CoolDot]

Must a 'sucks' site be advertisement free to enjoy such protection?

Or turned the question around: Must a site talk about why something (a trademark) sucks? Can it also be a discussion, or fan-message-board site to enjoy the same protection?

Maybe you could take a quick look at my "HarryPotterTalk.com" thread here in the legal section.

Basically is critique and chat or discussion about a trademark legally equal? Are both protected under the free speech right?