news TOGG.com - UDRP filed against togg.com

always these Turkish companies filing UDRP…

Kidding!

I hope the LLLL.com registrant, wins without knowing anything about the case.

So this appears to be Turkey's Automobile Enterprise Group.

They have a number of trademarks and similar domains.

Trademark filed in 2018, looks like they were founded in 2018. The domain has been registered since 2003.

To file a UDRP a person should have to place 100k in escrow and if it is ruled it was done recklessly the domain owner should get all the funds.

AEProgram said:

Trademark filed in 2018, looks like they were founded in 2018. The domain has been registered since 2003.

To file a UDRP a person should have to place 100k in escrow and if it is ruled it was done recklessly the domain owner should get all the funds.

Click to expand...

Chill out bro… Only if guilty of RDNH is found.
As of now, a potential RDNH is not a good enough deterrent, they still spent $$$ to file.

I would build my own togg site and never cave in on this request.
Try Other General Generic buddy for your bs.

nice domain,good luck

AEProgram said:

To file a UDRP a person should have to place 100k in escrow and if it is ruled it was done recklessly the domain owner should get all the funds.

Click to expand...

AEProgram said:

Trademark filed in 2018, looks like they were founded in 2018. The domain has been registered since 2003.

To file a UDRP a person should have to place 100k in escrow and if it is ruled it was done recklessly the domain owner should get all the funds.

Click to expand...

I agree that there needs to be some teeth to a RDNH ruling. As it stands right now, there is really no penalty. It is just a moral victory.

Putting up that amount of money though is unreasonable IMO. Sure, major companies could afford that but not every party bringing a dispute is a major company.

The vast majority of UDRP filings are warranted. It is probably less than 5% that are questionable, and under 1% that simply unreasonable.

I really think there needs to be some type of initial bar these need to clear, to weed out the most abusive ones..kind of like anti-slapp laws that exist now.

There also should be some sort of appeal process as well.

Brad

The domain owner will be win.

https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=D2021-1949

The Respondent is The Office of George Gould United States of America (“United States”), represented by John Berryhill, Ph.d., Esq., United States.

...

The Respondent submits that the Complainant had to know, when it selected TOGG as a mark in 2018, that the disputed domain name was already registered. and that this case was filed as a bad faith attempt to steal a legitimately registered and used senior name. The disputed domain name is a short, pronounceable four-letter domain name potentially of considerable commercial value. The Respondent is not even trying to sell the disputed domain name but is using it in the course of business conducted for 18 years. The Respondent reasonably believes the Complainant is behind one or more inquiries which have been made to purchase the disputed domain name.


The Panel notes that the Complainant has legal representation in this proceeding. The Complaint specified the creation date of the disputed domain name in 2003, which was 16 years before the earliest registrations of the Complainant’s trademarks in March 2019. Although the Complaint also specified that the WhoIs details for the disputed domain name were last updated in December 2019, the Complainant does not articulate any argument that this would have been the acquisition date of the disputed domain name (which appears by all accounts not to be the case) such that the Respondent would have acquired the disputed domain name after the Complainant acquired its trademark rights. The Complaint merely argues that the Respondent “keeps” the disputed domain name in bad faith. The Panel does note that the Complaint was initially filed against a privacy service, and that the disputed domain name redirects to a business that on the surface bears no relation to the “togg” initials but that in the interval between filing the Complaint and purporting to withdraw it, the Complainant obtained the privacy-protected details of the Respondent, as confirmed by the Registrar, and the Center notified the amended Complaint to the Respondent. While the relation between “togg” and the redirection of the disputed domain name to the “tcbinc” site would still not necessarily have been readily apparent, the Complainant did not articulate any specific argument that the acquisition of the disputed domain name by the Respondent post-dated the Complainant’s business launch and publicity.
...

Therefore, the Panel declares that the Complaint was brought in bad faith and constitutes an abuse of the administrative proceeding.

The best bit, though was this.

If you remember this scene from Gran Torino:


I re-wrote it as:


The Panel included it in the decision:

For whatever reason, a couple of the Turkish media outlets liked it too:

I should have left in "no dick", but they have one, and he looks unhappy.