May the farce be with you!


To succeed in a Complaint, Disney has to prove to the Expert on the balance of probabilities, pursuant to §2 of the Policy that:

1. The Complainant has Rights in respect of a name or mark which is identical or similar
to the Domain Name; and

2. The Domain Name, in the hands of the Respondent, is an Abusive Registration.

Abusive Registration

An abusive registration is defined in §1 of the Policy as a Domain Name which either:

1. was registered or otherwise acquired in a manner which, at the time when the registration or acquisition took place, took unfair advantage of or was unfairly detrimental to the Complainant’s Rights; or

2. has been used in a manner which has taken unfair advantage of or has been unfairly detrimental to the Complainant’s Rights.

A key part to the owner’s argument was that it has taken so long to respond ( over ten years) sadly this argument wont wash.

The case of Emirates v. Michael Toth (DRS Case No. 08634) states “The generally held view amongst Nominet experts (and UDRP panellists) is that delay alone is not a ground on which a Complaint may be denied”.

If you’d like to know more about this article please send an email to Michael Coyle quoting the article title and any questions you might have, alternatively call the office number on 02380 235 979 or send an enquiry through our contact form.

share this Article

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on whatsapp
Share on email

Recent Articles

How are NFT’s regulated in the UK?

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has not yet provided guidance on NFT’s specifically with regards to regulation in the United Kingdom (UK). However, the FCA