The real story of Hromadske v Skrypin REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES we - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES The real story of Hromadske v Skrypin

REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES we are? Who

REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES ned? happene What ha Wha

REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES happened? What ha Wh

REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES happened? What ha Wh

REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES ! happened? What ha Wh

UDRP howto REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES (i) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and (ii) you have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and (iii) your domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

Skrypin case | facts REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES 1. DATE of domain registration On 14 September 2012 Respondent registered two domain names: “hromadske.tv” and “suspilne.tv”. On 10 June 2013 a non-government organization “Hromadske Telebachennya” was registered in Ukraine. Respondent was registered as the CEO of the organization as well as its founder along with other 7 journalists

Skrypin case | facts REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES 2. Hromadske.tv or Public television? The founder issue. ”I will not be very original. Roman Skrypin called me and then things started off and rolling” In November 2012 Respondent prepared the Project plan for idea

Skrypin case | facts REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES 3. Distinctiveness of Hromadske.tv TM & use of subdomain the term “hromadske tv” (“public tv”) in no way distinguishes the Complainant or is associated exclusively by the Complainant «hromadske.cherkasy.ua», «hromadske.lviv.ua», «hromadske-zak.tv», «hromadske-zp.tv», «hromadske.od.ua»

Skrypin case | Result REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES (i) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to … a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and (ii) you have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of … the domain name; and (iii) your domain name has been registered and is being ❌ used in bad faith.

Bad faith is… REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES (i) registered primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of your documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name ; or

Bad faith is… REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES (ii) domain name registered to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that you have engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or (iii) registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or

Bad faith is… REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES (iv) creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location

Bad faith in Skrypin case REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES ”the Domain Name was chosen and registered long before Mr. Skrypin became involved in the Complainant and before the founders of the Complainant decided to adopt the name “Hromadske.TV”. If this is correct, it is hard to see how that registration could have been in bad faith”

Bad faith in Skrypin case REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES ”the nature of the Domain Name is such that it is not inherently improbable that the Domain Name was chosen by the Respondent before that name was chosen for the Complainant.”

Sho tam pro ”opportunism”? REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES Th That is not not to o say say that at the Pane anel l fi finds nds the Re Responde spondent nt and/ and/or or Mr. Sk Skrypin ac actions ions in in this is case ase af after the Dom omain ain Nam ame was as regist gistered d par partic icular larly ly at attrac activ ive. . th the F Facebook c comme mments ts o of M Mr. Sk Skrypin re regard rding possible “s “sale pu purchase ase or or le lease ase agr agreement nts” fo for the Domain Name, sug uggests that Mr Mr. Sk Skrypin and/ and/or or the Responde spondent nt hav ave ac acted d oppor opportunist nistic ically ally to o say say the le least ast

E-mail: poke_us@axon.partners beregovyi@axon.partners Facebook: axon.partners den.beregovyi The End ! REIMAGINING LEGAL SERVICES