Mark said:
I just don't see why anyone would say this isn't generic is my biggest problem with the whole situation.
Maybe a thing with few people is they think a so-called generic or descriptive
word or letters is generic or descriptive for everything and anything. They do
not work that way.
Using one of my previous examples, GE may be generic or descriptive for just
a pair of letters. But are they generic or descriptive for lighting products and
financial services?
In this case, it so happens the complainant was able to prove they do have a
trademark for the letters LH for their services. And it also so happens that the
panel "finds that such use is not a use in connection with a bona fide offering
of goods or services pursuant to Policy", even though one dissented.
Measures like UDRP and a civil suit are ideally intended to resolve disputes. Of
course, since we all live in the real world...
scabies said:
Right. I'm not defending all of this, just pointing out that this isn't as malicious as it's being portrayed. It wasn't "hey let's see if we can save a few million and hijack this domain", I think it was more out of desperation because all other avenues were roadblocked.
That's also what I was thinking. It also just so happens there are a couple of
other decisions by various panelists that are consistently...questionable...