Legal dispute cases present an interesting insight into the study of human behavior and mannerisms. It is often said that conflict shapes characters. Legal arbitration thus provides us with an opportunity into human character analysis.
Nuro Corp. is a Canadian company working in the healthcare sector. The Company had approached the WIPO in relation to the domain name Nuro.com. The Complainant claimed trademark rights over the NURO mark. The Complainant obtained the trademark rights over the term in Canada in 2016 and in the US in 2021. The Complainant also claimed usage of the term since 2016.
The Respondent is a French domain name investor. The Response also owns other domain names like Domaining.com and Catchy.com. The disputed domain name was registered by the Respondent in February 2015. The Respondent claims that it registered the domain name for the purpose of sale or lease. At the time of the case’s proceedings, the platform at the contested domain name read, “The problem with not having the .com of your name is that it signals weakness. Fix it now …”.
The panel found that the domain name was registered by the Respondent years before the trademark registration as well as the first use of the same by the Complainant. The panel also found that the Respondent was using the domain name for lease and sale purposes continuously, since inception. In that case the Respondent couldn’t have been using the domain name in bad faith. The Complaint was denied.
The panel however found that the Complainant had access to legal aid. In that situation, the Complainant should have known that because of registration dates, its case won’t stand a chance. The Complainant, in spite of this knowledge, went on with the Complaint. The panel thus awarded the Complainant with a RDNH.
Read the full case here.