Dan.com

legal Stanley Pace wins Reverse Domain Name Hijacking Decision in Court, Overturning UDRP

NameSilo
Impact
2,919
13 0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
Impact
411
So will there be any consequences for the Sole Panelist, Robert A. Badgley, who got the decision wrong? When a UDRP decision is overturned by a judge, they should go back and look at whether the panelist that made the incorrect decision should continue deciding UDRPs.
 
Impact
2,919
Probably the same 'consequences' of the panelists who invented and pushed the "retroactive bad faith" (Octogen) line of cases, that resulted in numerous bad decisions.

https://circleid.com/posts/20170507_rise_and_fall_of_udrp_theory_of_retroactive_bad_faith

i.e. zero negative consequences at all. Indeed, those panelists probably get more cases -- in 3-person panels, both sides can submit lists of panelists, so complainants will put them on the lists given their past leanings.
 
Impact
5,744
So will there be any consequences for the Sole Panelist
Formally - no. Less formally - a big question. In any case, UDRP was lost because of the following:

The chief problem Respondent faces in this proceeding is his lack of credibility with the Panel. This is based on his unambiguous statement that, on May 14, 2011, when he registered the Domain Name, he had searched the USPTO database for any CELLUVATION trademark and found none. As set forth above, this cannot be a true statement, since, as of May 14, 2011, there were two live registered USPTO trademarks for CELLUVATION.

In the court, however, Responded explained that he in fact used Google and not USPTO, and this explanation was accepted:

Before purchasing the Disputed Domain, he conducted an internet search and found no evidence of any use or planned use of the term “celluvation.” He did so by using Google to look for the word “celluvation.”

Moreover, Responded explained that he used Google Analytics before bidding on the domain name on auction, and this explanation was also accepted:

Pace used Google Analytics, which tracks unique visitors to each website, to determine traffic flow before he decided to bid on the Disputed Domain.

===
So, basically, the Responded provided new facts to the court, and won the case as the result. No wrongdoing by WIPO panelist, since the panelist was unaware of these facts.
 
Last edited:
Impact
411
===
So, basically, the Responded provided new facts to the court, and won the case as the result. No wrongdoing by WIPO panelist, since the panelist was unaware of these facts.

Thank you for looking into the case further than I did. I still do hope they go back and review the facts of this case, and take a look back anytime the UDRP and court decisions end in different decisions, to see what happened and make sure panelists are acting appropriately.
 
Last edited:

NYJimbo

Domain Re-AnimatorTop Contributor
Impact
6,843
"DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for willful and inexcusable failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders"

LOL.
 

NickB

it's a mysteryTop Contributor
Impact
15,922
So this idiot basically ignored all the court orders, didn't show up, failed to defend his case and Pace still had to pay all the legal fees.....At least he got the domain back

But still.....what a load of sh*t.......