Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions |
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA
San
Francisco, CA
COMPLAINANT
Van
Nuys, CA
RESPONDENT
This is a DOMAIN
NAME dispute between the parties (hereafter Grodberg and Rugly) and will be
decided on the record provided by the
parties.
Grodberg represents himself; Rugly is represented by Christie Parker
& Hale LLP, Intellectual Property Lawyers.
The Domain
Names at issue, registered with Network Solutions, which are the subject of
this complaint are as follows:
phonespell.com
phonespell.net
phonesspell.com
phonespel.com
phonespel.org
Grodberg asserts
that PhoneSpell has been in continuous use by him since July 12, 1996 as the
name of a web site and service for selecting
telephone numbers based on what
words they spell and other related services.
He notes that various news articles have reported on PhoneSpell and that
he filed a Servicemark application on December 8, 1999. He further asserts that the second level
variations of the spelling are all pronounced the same and appear to be a
misspelling or
a typing error of PhoneSpell.
He also notes
that Rugly, except for phonespell.com, is not commonly known by any of the
“second level” domain names and is not making
any commercial use of the other
spelling variations. Rugly has also
been advertising on Grodberg PhoneSpell since 1998 and did not register phonespell
until January 18, 2000 following
unsatisfactory negotiation with Grodberg
regarding these names.
Rugly argues
that Grodberg is attempting to prevent anyone else from making “phonespell” as
a second level domain and that Rugly’s
use of phonespell is for services that are quite distinct from
Grodberg’s. Rugly also notes that he
purchased phonespell .com from Taka
Communications (registered March 19, 1997) which he now uses in connection with
his Vanity toll-free number business.
1. Grodberg has an application for a Servicemark,
but has not been issued a certificate for same and thus has no
Trademark/Servicemark
rights in phonespell.
2. Grodberg has made no showing that
phonespell has acquired any secondary
meaning.
3. Rugly and Grodberg have businesses that
are somewhat similar but are not identical.
4. Following the purchase of phonespell.com
from Taka Communications in October 1999, Rugly has been using that name to
further his business.
5. Grodberg seeks to have all the disputed
domain names transferred to him.
The parties
are engaged in similar but not identical businesses to provide “Vanity” or easy
to remember words or phrases from telephone
number keypads (e.g. 1-800-CALL
ATT); they apparently are not the only companies which provide this service.
Grodberg may
have started using PhoneSpell earlier than Rugly, but for whatever reasons did
little in a timely manner to protect his
exclusive interest in the word and the various (mis)spellings he now seeks
to claim. He also knew or should have
known that since phonespell.com was not available to him that other parties had
an interest in these names.
Negotiations between the parties failed to produce a satisfactory
result, following which Rugly purchased
phonespell.com from Taka Communication.
Both parties
want exclusive use of these names at issue and/or to prohibit their use by
others.
It is the
decision of the undersigned that the disputed Domain Names shall not be
transferred to Grodberg.
This the 2nd
day of March 2000.
I further
certify that I have no known conflict of interest to serve as Arbitrator in
this proceeding.
Honorable Marilyn W. Carney (Ret.)
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page
WorldLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/GENDND/2000/21.html