The WIPO Domain Name Dispute Case D2020-2353

This dispute involved the domain name “normani.com,” contested between Normani GmbH, a German company, and Stanley Pace, an individual in the United States. Normani GmbH argued that the domain name was identical to their trademark, which they had been using for over twenty years, and that Stanley Pace had no legitimate interests or rights in the domain name. They also contended that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith, primarily for sale or transfer to the complainant or a related party.

Stanley Pace, on the other hand, argued that he registered the domain name because he believed it to be a generic and marketable term. He also initiated a court case seeking a declaratory judgment that his registration and use of the domain name did not violate any rights under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act or the Lanham Act, alleging reverse domain name hijacking.

The WIPO Panel, led by Matthew Kennedy, found that while the domain name was identical to Normani GmbH’s trademark, there was no substantial evidence to suggest that Pace was aware of this trademark at the time of registration or that he registered the domain name in bad faith. The panel also noted the lack of evidence to establish Normani GmbH’s trademark’s renown outside Germany at the time of the domain name’s registration. Consequently, the complaint was denied on November 3, 2020. This case highlights the complexities in domain name disputes, especially around the issues of trademark awareness and bad faith registration​​.

This dispute involved the domain name “normani.com,” contested between Normani GmbH, a German company, and Stanley Pace, an individual in the United States. Normani GmbH argued that the domain name was identical to their trademark, which they had been using for over twenty years, and that Stanley Pace had no legitimate interests or rights in…