Loading.com Subject of UDRP (Updated)
A UDRP has been filed against the Loading.com domain name at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The complainant for this case is listed as Javier Narvaez Segura / Grupo Loading Systems S.L. This is WIPO Case D2016-1199.
Loading.com is a dictionary keyword .com domain name owned by Mrs Jello, LLC, the company that was founded by the late Igal Lichtman, who passed away in 2013. I believe the company continues to be operated by his family. DomainTools shows that Loading.com was created in July of 1998. Historical Whois records from DomainTools show that Mrs Jello has owned the domain name since at least 2009. Loading.com is not currently resolving for me, although it appears that the domain name was once parked with a PPC landing page. I do not see any public sales history for Loading.com in NameBio.
I did a bit of Google searching, and it appears that the complainant is a company based in Spain. If my searching is correct, it looks like the company uses a ccTLD domain name with the same keyword for its website: Loading.es. The footer on the Loading.es website says, “© 2016 Group Loading Systems SL”. A Whois search shows that the Loading.es domain name was created in 2003, several years after the Loading.com domain name was created.
In my opinion, a keyword .com domain name like this should not be the subject of a UDRP barring extenuating circumstances.
I don’t know how the complainant would prevail in this UDRP, but even if they do prevail, the case may not be over. Mrs Jello lost a controversial UDRP decision for Camilla.com, and the company subsquently filed a lawsuit to block the transfer of the domain name. At the time of publication, Mrs Jello still owns Camilla.com, and I am unsure about the status of this litigation.
I will continue to follow developments with this UDRP and will provide an update when I see one.
Update: According to UDRPSearch.com, the UDRP was denied. The domain owner was represented by attorney John Berryhill. The decision can be found here. IMO, the key part of the decision was the following “The Panel considers that a respondent has a right to register and use a domain name to attract Internet traffic based on the appeal of commonly used descriptive or dictionary terms, in the absence of circumstances indicating that the respondent’s aim in registering the disputed domain name was to profit from and exploit the complainant’s trademark.”
Reach out to Elliot: Twitter | Google + | Facebook | Email