A word with a life beyond the stage
On 24 July 2000, the panelist in WIPO case D2000-0596 denied Gordon Sumner’s request, brought under his professional name Sting, for the transfer of sting.com from Michael Urvan.
The decision notes that “sting” is also a common English word. The registrant pointed to its use as his nickname. The panelist found that the required bad faith had not been established.
Not every disagreement is cybersquatting
The artist’s fame did not remove the need to establish the requirements of the procedure. A domain matching a trademark or a well-known name does not automatically prove that it was registered to exploit that reputation.
Calling everyone who holds a desired domain a “cybersquatter” can therefore mislead. The complaint failed in this case, but that does not give anyone blanket permission to register famous names.
An existing registration may serve a legitimate purpose
For your business, understanding the situation comes first. Does the registrant operate under that name? Since when? What rights can you establish yourself? These questions matter more than certainty based on resemblance alone.
Avoid starting a negotiation with an accusation that has not been assessed. If the name matters, a specialist can help distinguish a relevant legal route from a potential purchase or an alternative choice.
Madonna.com and sting.com make an instructive pair: two famous artists, two transfer requests and two different outcomes.
Put it into practice
Explore the related Wize guideSources
A correction to suggest? info@wize.lu