The fee schedule is entertaining http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/fees/index.html you can submitt your complaints in bulk and have a choice of panalists - 1 or the tribunal arrangement - bury them with three. Very entertaining. On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, domainiac wrote: > WIPO sure makes a lot of inferences. > > > > > http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0004.html > > ... > > It is not clear from the allegations regarding respondent�s offer to sell > the Domain Name whether the domain name was registered or acquired > "primarily for the purpose of selling" the domain name "for valuable > consideration in excess of the documented out-of-pocket costs directly > related to the domain name." Moreover, the complainant candidly admits she > is "not sure if the respondent originally intended to register and use the > Domain Name in bad faith." Nevertheless, without contrary evidence, it is > possible to infer that the domain name was registered and used for that > purpose. > > That inference is supported by the respondent�s failure for a substantial > period of time to make good faith use of the domain name for its business. > "American Vintage" is an apt descriptive or suggestive term for antiques, > the apparent business of respondent, based on his name, Big Daddy�s > Antiques. Nevertheless, it is appears that respondent has done nothing with > the Domain Name for over two years. While inconclusive, it is possible to > infer from this failure of use that the domain name was registered without a > bona fide intent to make good faith use. > > Finally, we believe the respondent�s failure to present any evidence must be > considered on the issue of bad faith. Mr. Brown�s comment, "Well, you will > probably have to sue me," indicates a general awareness of his right to > defend himself, thus his failure to do so seems particularly significant. In > the Commencement Notification, respondent was informed that Paragraph 14 of > the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy provides that > the Panel "may draw such inferences from your default as it considers > appropriate." It is a general principle of United States law that the > failure of a party to submit evidence on facts in its control may permit the > court to draw an adverse inference regarding those facts. Here, the > potential evidence of good faith registration and use was in respondent�s > control. Respondent�s failure to present any such evidence or to deny > complainant�s allegations allows an inference that the evidence would not > have been favorable to respondent. > > ... >
