Decoding the WIPO Case D2020-2725: A Landmark RDNH Decision

In the case of WIPO D2020-2725, the domain name at the center of the dispute was “function4.com.” The complainant, Function 4, LLC, and the respondent, Michael McGrath, engaged in a legal battle over this domain name. The decision in this case, delivered on January 17, 2021, by the sole panelist Frederick M. Abbott, denied the complaint and made a notable finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) against the complainant.

Function 4, LLC, claimed rights to the “FUNCTION4” trademark, registered in 2016, and alleged that McGrath had no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, accusing him of bad faith in its registration and use. However, McGrath demonstrated substantial and legitimate use of the domain name dating back to 2001 for professional marketing services, long before the complainant’s trademark registration.

The panel concluded that the complainant, despite being aware that McGrath’s domain name registration predated its trademark rights, pursued the claim. This action led to the panel’s decision against Function 4, LLC, for engaging in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, highlighting a misuse of the UDRP process. This case serves as a significant precedent in understanding the balance between trademark rights and existing domain name registrations.

In the case of WIPO D2020-2725, the domain name at the center of the dispute was “function4.com.” The complainant, Function 4, LLC, and the respondent, Michael McGrath, engaged in a legal battle over this domain name. The decision in this case, delivered on January 17, 2021, by the sole panelist Frederick M. Abbott, denied the…