A person from Korea
against American Twitter ‘www.twitter.com.’
Originally, the suit was filed by Mr.A from Korea
who protested against a decision
about a domain’s cancellation.
Last year, Mr.A received a decision from the Internet Address
Dispute Resolution Committee that he should cancel the domain.
In this regard, he said that the relevant site is a
travel-associated site.
In a result, it did not interrupt any SNS activities of
American Twitter.
Also, he claimed that it cannot be a violation of American
Twitter’s rights because his domain
was registered in 2008 while American Twitter was given a registration of
service mark by the Patent and Trademark Office in 2009.
Because of these reasons, he filed a lawsuit against the decision of
cancellation.
However, Seoul Central District Court assumed that he would benefit
from the domain. In 2009 when American Twitter received a registration of
service mark,
it is estimated that he has already about 3180 domains.
At that time, he had to change other domains from WIPO
as he did not
have a right to use those domains.
Department of justice judged that the domain ‘www.twitter.co.kr’ can get profit from people searching for Twitter. The moment Mr.A registered
this domain as a service mark, Twitter was worldwide SNS. Therefore, it was
inevitable that he recognized Twitter.
As a consequence, Department of justice
made a decision that
American Twitter has a right to claim the cancellation of
the domain.
<above is from 'kipris.or.kr', trademark search result related to Twitter>
Furthermore, even though ‘www.twitter.co.kr’ seems to be a travel-related site,
it is just a
copy of other travel agency’s site.
Also, it does not
have a corporate registration number and secured payment number. Additionally, there
is no evidence if any actual business.
For these reasons, the Court decided that Mr.A cannot have a right
to have a domain.
There is no exaggeration that an individual’s right, especially when it comes to a possessive right, should be
assured. Nonetheless, if it harms others’ rights,
there is no guarantee even for possessive rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment