The domain name was registered by the judge protection in the right people

Beijing second intermediate people’s court recently concluded Beijing easyvoice era network technology Co. Ltd. v. Beck · respectively; & McKenzie, French law firm Kidd computer network domain name dispute case, the court verdict dismissed the plaintiff to the Time Inc on the confirmation of domain names involved for all of its property claim.

The case involves

for computer network domain name registration, erzhongyuan verdict, to protect the interests of the prior rights.

It is reported that

, the plaintiff said in April 2007 from the outsider Beijing saibole Technology Co. Ltd. at the legal transferee made the domain name "", "". From July 2007 "China international economic and Trade Arbitration Commission domain name dispute resolution center were ruled, the domain name transferred to the firm and the firm of Kidd & mckenzie.

plaintiffs believe that the defendant has constituted a reverse domain name hijacking, requesting the court to confirm the domain name of the plaintiff’s property.

court, the two defendants were involved and the defendant argued: the domain name enjoy prior rights of registered trademarks and international top-level domain composed of approximation, enough to cause confusion, disputes involving domain name registration is malicious. Therefore, the court dismissed the request of the Time Inc lawsuit.

court believes that Cerberus company, Elane Time Inc registration, transfer the domain name with malicious behavior, the main part of the domain name Baker "and" Gide "does not enjoy rights, no registration and use of domain names involved justification. The major part of the domain name and the defendant McKenzie firm registered trademark and domain name rights priority right, the same or similar, sufficient to cause misidentification of the relevant public, constitute unfair competition of firms, firm Kidd mckenzie.

According to

, the second court to make a ruling, dismissed the lawsuit of Beijing Yi Yi network technology Co., ltd.. After the verdict, both sides did not appeal, the case is now in force.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *