29 July 2010

Settling a UDRP: a guide to provider practices

Fionn O'Raghallaigh, London

A recent UDRP decision has highlighted the different practices providers have when cases settle before a panel is appointed. Managing Internet IP examines each provider’s policy

In the National Arbitration Forum (NAF) decision RE/MAX, LLC v Pat Newton Properties c/o Patrick Newton, panellist David H Bernstein declined the respondent’s request to forego the arbitration and decided to issue a full decision. This was partly the result of a request from the complainant and partly because of the respondent’s persistent registration of domains containing trade marks.

The rest of this article is available to subscribers to Managing Internet IP only.

Managing IP subscribers also have access to Managing Patents, Trade marks and Copyright until 30th October 2010.
Managing IP trialists have access to Managing Patents, Trade marks and Copyright for 48-hours.

Subscribe today for full access to this article. Alternatively, take a 48-hour free trial giving you access to the current content.

If you are already a subscriber please log in (see top right column) to access the rest of this article.

Managing Intellectual Property

Navigation Menu

Managing IP Home Page

Managing IP Products

Browse Magazine

IP Resources

Settling a UDRP: a guide to provider practices

The rest of this article is available to subscribers to Managing Internet IP only.

Events