Analysis of WIPO Domain Name Dispute Case D2018-0151

In the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center case D2018-0151, the dispute involved the domain name “leopay.com”. The complainant, iCard AD from Bulgaria, claimed rights to the LEUPAY and LEOPAY trademarks, while the respondent, Yongchang Zhang from China, used the domain for personal and business purposes since 2008.

The panel found iCard AD lacked standing to include the LEOPAY trademark in its complaint, having only a non-exclusive license, and insufficient proof of the owner’s authorization to file the complaint. The panel acknowledged iCard’s rights in the LEUPAY trademark but noted the domain’s registration predated iCard’s trademark rights.

Evidence showed the respondent used “leopay.com” for a personal blog and business projects. This use, along with the timing of the domain’s registration, led the panel to conclude the domain was not registered or used in bad faith. The panel further criticized iCard’s approach, including its attempt to solicit an offer for the domain as evidence and ignoring established UDRP precedent. Consequently, the complaint was denied, and iCard AD was found guilty of reverse domain name hijacking.

This case highlights the importance of trademark ownership, the relevance of a domain’s registration date in relation to trademark rights, and the perils of overreaching in domain dispute claims​​.

In the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center case D2018-0151, the dispute involved the domain name “leopay.com”. The complainant, iCard AD from Bulgaria, claimed rights to the LEUPAY and LEOPAY trademarks, while the respondent, Yongchang Zhang from China, used the domain for personal and business purposes since 2008. The panel found iCard AD lacked standing to…