See also another recent case regarding the 16 year old domain name TRTL.com (Coolside Limited v. Get On The Web Limited) in which the Panelist stated that the case brought by Coolside Ltd. was "an abuse of the administrative proceeding" stating that "Among the reasons cited by UDRP panels for a finding of RDNH or other abuse are the following, all of which are present in this case".
Coolside Limited was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another recent case regarding the 15 year old domain name CHOOZE.com (Degani Designs, LLC v. Chris Morling / Dot Zinc Limited) in which the Panelist stated that the case brought by Degani Designs LLC was "particularly abusive use of the Policy" stating that "Clearly, precedence established under countless previous UDRP rulings suggests that there is no chance to obtain a positive outcome when there is no evidence presented to establish that a complainant has rights in a mark prior to registration of the disputed domain name....".
Degani Designs LLC was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another recent case regarding the 16 year old domain name SIMPLEDOLLAR.com (Soda LLC v. SIMPLEDOLLAR.COM) in which the Panelist stated that the case brought by Soda LLC was a case in which "Had Complainant considered prudently the elements of bad faith under the third element of the Policy, and done its homework regarding the Telstra case on which Complainant relied, Complainant should have been able to determine easily that the circumstances in this case differ fundamentally from those in Telstra, and there could be no finding of bad faith"
Soda LLC was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another recent case regarding the 19 year old domain name DREAMLINES.com (Dreamlines GmbH v. Darshinee Naidu / World News Inc.) in which the Panelist stated that the case brought by Dreamlines GmbH was a case in which "The Panel is satisfied that the Complainant must or at least ought to have appreciated at the outset that its complaint could not likely succeed".
Dreamlines GmbH was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another recent case regarding the 9 year old domain name FUELFORTHOUGHT.com (Cognate Nutritionals, Inc. v. Martin Zemitis / Entria.com) in which the Panelist stated that the case brought by Cognate Nutritionals, Inc. was a case in which "Complainant not only acknowledges that it obtained its trademark registration years after the disputed domain name was registered." and "Prior UDRP panels have found a complainant to have acted in bad faith if it knew, or should have known, that its complaint could not reasonably succeed.  Included in those cases are circumstances where the complaint’s failure would be a foregone conclusion based upon the fact that the disputed domain name was registered long before the complainant obtained its trademark rights.".
Cognate Nutritionals, Inc. was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another recent case regarding the 9 year old domain name CHINAREADY.com (China Ready and Accredited Pty Ltd v. Warren Weitzman, Caramba LLC) in which the Panelist stated that the case brought by China Ready and Accredited Pty Ltd was a case in which "the Complainant could never have prevailed" and "it is unlikely that this obvious deficiency in its case could have been overlooked by the Complainant, who is represented by counsel"
China Ready and Accredited Pty Ltd were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another recent case regarding the 18 year old domain name INTERLIGHT.com (International Lighting Corporation v. Beat Brunner and Interlight SA) in which the Panelist stated that the case brought by International Lighting Corporation was a case which "In the view of the Panel this is a complaint which should never have been launched." and "an abuse of the administrative proceeding."
International Lighting Corporation were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another recent case regarding the 12 year old domain name DKY.com (Dumankaya Yapi Malzemeleri SAN. VE TIC. A.S v. Domain Administrator, Name Administration Inc. (BVI)) in which the Panelist stated that the case brought by Dumankaya Yapi Malzemeleri SAN. VE TIC. A.S was a case which "is one which should never have been launched and where the case as advanced by the Complainant was not likely to succeed" and "the Complainant has used the Policy in bad faith."
Dumankaya Yapi Malzemeleri SAN. VE TIC. A.S were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another recent case regarding the 12 year old domain name ZIC.com (SK Lubricants Americas v. Andrea Sabatini, Webservice Limited) in which the Panelists stated that the case brought by SK Lubricants Americas was "a complaint which should never have been launched.".
SK Lubricants Americas were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another recent case regarding the 16 year old domain name NEWFORESTS.com (New Forests Asset Management Pty Limited v. Kerry Schorsch, Global Advertizing, LLC) in which the Panelists stated that the case brought by New Forests Asset Management was "brought in bad faith and constitutes an abuse of the administrative proceeding." and "In particular, proceedings must not be commenced in a brash and totally unjustifiable attempt to pressure a domain name owner into releasing a legitimately held domain name that considerably pre-dates any trademark rights held by the complainant".
New Forests Asset Management were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another recent case regarding the 12 year old domain name ERENTER.com (E-Renter USA Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc) in which the Panelists stated that the case brought by E-Renter USA Ltd. was "a Complaint which should never have been launched.".
E-RENTER USA Ltd. were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 14 year old domain name YPLAN.com (YPlan, Inc. v. Kim, Dongjin / Dongjin Kim) in which the Panelist stated that the case brought by YPlan Inc. was "an abuse of the administrative proceeding".
YPlan Inc. were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 16 year old 4-letter domain name BOON.com (Wirecard AG v. Telepathy Inc., Development Services).
Wirecard AG was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 11 year old 4-letter domain name IUNO.com (IUNO Advokatpartnerselskab v. Angela Croom) which WIPO Panelists called a "Baseless Complaint". Even more astonishing when the Complainant is itself a lawfirm.
Denmark lawfirm IUNO Advokatpartnerselskab was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 13 year old 4-letter domain name VERB.com (Verb Products Inc.; Verb Hair Products Canada Inc.; Moroccanoil Israel Ltd. v. Richard Bloxham) which WIPO Panelists called a "Baseless Complaint" and a "Foolish Waste of Time" which talks of Johnny-Come-Lately trademark owners who register trademarks and try to seize pre-existing domain names.
Verb Products Inc., Verb Hair Products Canada Inc. and Moroccanoil Israel Ltd were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 10 year old domain name SFGAME.com (Playa Games GmbH v. CBS Interactive Inc.) in which the Panelist stated that "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."
Playa Games GmbH were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 12 year old domain name GLOBEWAY.com (Globeway LLC v. Domain Administrator / Vertical Axis Inc.) in which NAF Panelists stated that "The Complainant's actions lacked attention and imposed burdens and costs upon the Respondent.". The Panel were also concerned that abusive complaints risk diminishing the credibility of the entire UDRP process. The Panelists ruled that Globeway LLC had made allegations which were false and contrary to the facts that could easily have been obtained.
Globeway LLC were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 16 year old domain name COUNTRYGIRL.com (LML Investments LLC v. P.A. Gordon) in which NAF Panelists said that the Complainant's case was "Devoid of Merit".
LML Investments LLC. and Jeremiah A. Pastrick of Continental Enterprises were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the domain name ASIACHARTS.com (registered 4 years before the Complainant was even formed) in which the Panelists said "Even a cursory review of the UDRP and UDRP decisions would have alerted Complainant that this case was Devoid of Merit." and that "Complainant knew when it filed the Complaint that it could not prove at least 2, if not all 3 of the elements to prevail."
Asia Charts Pte. Ltd. of Singapore was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 7 year old domain name PHONEID.com (TeleSign Corporation, a California Corporation v. Domain Administrator / Vertical Axis Inc.) in which NAF Panelists said "Complainant knew or should have known that it would be unable to prove at least two of the elements needed to prevail."
TeleSign Corporation was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 14 year old domain name SQUIRRELS.com (Squirrels LLC v. Giorgio Uzonian) in which WIPO Panelists said "there is no dispute that respondent registered the disputed domain name at least 14 years prior to the time Complainant registered its SQUIRRELS marks. As further noted, it is therefore implausible that respondent could have had intent to profit from Complainant's trademark rights at the time he registered the disputed domain name."
Squirrels LLC was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 15 year old domain name SpeedTest.org (Scene LLC, dba Ookla v. Domain Buyer / Innovation HQ, Inc.,) in which the Panelists said "Respondent contends that Complainant knew of Respondent’s rights in the disputed domain name, because Respondent registered the disputed domain name six years before Complainant first used its alleged mark and four years before Complainant’s LLC was formed."
Scene LLC, dba Ookla was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 14 year old domain name RVK.com (R.V. Kuhns & Associates, Inc. v. Gregory Ricks / Whois Privacy Corp. / Domain Administrator) in which the Panelists said "Complainant must therefore have been aware that Respondent cannot have registered the disputed domain name in bad faith, since he cannot possibly have known of Complainant's as-yet-nonexistent claim to the mark."
R.V. Kuhns & Associates, Inc. was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 10 year old domain name LeadPages.com (Avenue 81, Inc. v. Karl Payne ) in which the Panelists said "The Complainant’s assertion that the Respondent passively held the disputed domain name with the patience of Job, awaiting the day when the Complainant or some other third party would eventually adopt “Leadpages” for use as a business identifier, borders on the absurd, and as the record reveals is simply untrue as a matter of fact – facts the Complainant could and should have found out for itself with a brief Internet search before filing the Complaint"
Avenue 81, Inc. was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 9 year old domain name Optilead.com (Optilead Ltd. v. Christophe de Larquier) in which the Panelists said "…it seems to the Panel that this Complaint is without merit at all and was entirely contrived in order to obtain a domain name that someone else had bona fide registered many years prior to the commencement of the Complainant’s business." and "The Policy is intended to alleviate cybersquatting and not as a tool for commercial bullying".
Optilead Ltd. was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 15 year old domain name GreatRun.com (Nova Holdings Limited, Nova International Limited, and G.R. Events Limited v. Manheim Equities, Inc. and Product Reports, Inc.) in which the Panelists said "In light of the correspondence between the Complainants and the Respondents, occurring both before and after the filing of this Complaint, it is clear that the present proceeding was commenced in an attempt to pressure the Respondents into releasing a legitimately held domain name consisting of descriptive terms that was acquired without the Respondents having any likelihood of knowing of the existence of the Unregistered Mark given the limited geographical area in which the Complainants operated at the time.".
Nova Holdings Limited, Nova International Limited, and G.R. Events Limited were found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 15 year old domain name Booked.com (Booked Limited v. Privacydotlink Customer 251836 / Dominic Hulewicz) in which the Panelists said "In the view of the Panel this is a Complaint which should never have been launched.".
Booked Limited was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 12 year old domain name Takeout.com (Tarheel Take-Out, LLC v. Versimedia, Inc.) in which the Panelists said "For Complainant to have brought these meritless UDRP proceedings in the first place is such circumstances and to have put the Respondent to the not insignificant cost of having to mount a defense to a baseless claim should be discouraged.".
Tarheel Take-Out, LLC was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

See also another case regarding the 12 year old domain name Emerton.com (Emerton v. Peng Goh, Service Pro) in which the Panelists said "For the reasons set out above, it seems to the Panel that this Complaint is without merit at all and was entirely contrived in order to obtain a domain name that the Respondent had bona fide registered many years prior to the commencement of the Complainant's business or the registration of its trade marks."
Emerton of Paris was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.