legal Registered in 1996, Fenwicks.com is Subject of UDRP

[Gian]

Hi,
I just read this blogpost by Elliot Silver and want to share here

A UDRP was filed at the World Intellectual Property Organization involving Fenwicks.com. The case is WIPO Case D2017-0579.

Fenwicks.com was registered in October of 1996, making this domain name more than 20 years old. The domain name appears to be privately registered until just recently, with privacy being removed likely because of the UDRP filing. Now that the Whois record is no longer private, I see that the domain name is registered to a registrant called Fenwick Associates. It appears that the last name of the person associated with this entity is Fenwick.

Here is the link: http://www.domaininvesting.com/registered-in-1996-fenwicks-com-is-subject-of-udrp/

 

[HotKey]

Not to jump to conclusions, but so far looks like just another "entitlement" case where a company sees their matching name parked and think they have rights to it. Not seeing any infringements here yet.

 

[Wannabean]

It's a department store not 5 mins walk from my flat. They've been around a very long time (perhaps a lot longer than the name has been registered although I'd have to check) and I've never seen the name anywhere else, used for anything else. This is not a clear cut case either way.

EDIT: (I did check) The article linked in the opening post is horribly biased and appears to be written by somebody who simply looked at the date the name was registered and then drew their conclusions. It is possible that the name MAY have been registered in bad faith in 1996 and anybody doing any research whatsoever would be aware that fenwicks is a retail chain that began in 1882!!!!!

I am not saying the name WAS registered in bad faith, I'm just saying this is lazy writing that ignores facts that are freely available to anyone that can be bothered to google them.

 

[RBCDNs]

Not to jump to conclusions, but so far looks like just another "entitlement" case where a company sees their matching name parked and think they have rights to it. Not seeing any infringements here yet.

Totally agree.

 

[Wannabean]

Not to jump to conclusions

Said everyone who ever jumped to a conclusion.

 

[Wannabean]

I'd also be very interested to hear why the registrant bought the name in the first place. This isn't an obvious 1996 investment grade name.

If we're all going to rally round each other when companies try to take names unjustly, we could at least ask a few basic questions when the opposite might be happening. I'm not drawing any conclusions at this point.

 

[Brand Consultants]

I'd also be very interested to hear why the registrant bought the name in the first place. This isn't an obvious 1996 investment grade name.

If we're all going to rally round each other when companies try to take names unjustly, we could at least ask a few basic questions when the opposite might be happening. I'm not drawing any conclusions at this point.

The owner is Fenwick Associates and the owner of the business has a last name "Fenwick" if I'm not mistaken?