The UDRP case regarding SFGAME.COM

  
     
 

Playa Games GmbH of Hamburg, Germany loses UDRP case in its attempt to unfairly grab 10+ year old SFGAME.com domain name.

The Panelist ruled that Playa Games GmbH clearly should have known at the time that it filed its complaint that it could not prove an essential element under the Policy and found Playa Games GmbH guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

  
 


The panelist found that that domain name had not been registered in bad faith.

  
 
Alistair Payne, the Panelist stated: "It is, indeed, well-established that bad faith cannot be found when a disputed domain name has been registered by the Respondent before the acquisition of unregistered trade mark rights by the Complainant."		  
 


"..... the Respondent demonstrated that the disputed domain was registered by the Respondent at least 2 years prior to the Complainant’s first use of “SFGAME” mark. The disputed domain name was registered by the Respondent in 2007 and there is some prior evidence of use on the Internet since 2005. The Complainant submits that it started developing its game in 2009 and on checking the Complainant’s website the Panel notes that the Complainant’s company was only founded in 2009. The Respondent could therefore not have contemplated the Complainant’s existence or game at the time that the disputed domain name was registered. There is no evidence that the Respondent was aware of Complainant at that time."

The National Arbitration Forum ruling on the case (Playa Games GmbH v. CBS Interactive Inc.) can be found at Case No.: Number: 100980

  
 

Finding Playa Games GmbH guilty of reverse domain name hijacking, the panelist's concluding paragraph sums up by saying:

"A finding of reverse domain name hijacking is appropriate when a Complainant clearly should have known at the time that it filed its complaint that it could not prove an essential element under the Policy. In this case the Complainant should have been very well aware that the disputed domain name could not have been registered in bad faith because the Complaint’s mark and company did not exist at the date of registration of the disputed domain name. As a result, the Panel finds that reverse domain name hijacking is made out in this case."


  
 
 
 

There are news stories about the SFGame.com domain name UDRP case on TheDomains.com

There are numerous sources for "Reverse Domain Name Hijacking".  Amongst these are RDNH.com and HallOfShame.com (which includes a current list of those found guilty of trying to Reverse Hijack a Domain Name in which they had no legal rights. In other words they tried to bully the rightful owners into relinquishing their property and forcing these innocent parties to spend thousands to defend what they already own).

See also Does the UDRP do more harm than good? and The UDRP: A Problem at the Core of the Internet

 

Back to QLP.com (Quality Logo Products failed UDRP)