Press Release
New York (June 10, 2010) -- Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. ("Teva"), the world's leading generic pharmaceutical company, prevailed in a UDRP proceeding concerning the ownership of the domain name <myteva.com>.
A World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) panel transferred the domain name to Teva from a domain name speculator based in Denver, Colorado, Dworld LLC ("Dworld").
As a domain name speculator, Dworld registers or acquires domains for generating revenue from parked pages featuring sponsored links posted on its domains. Before Teva protested the registration and use of the domain name, Dworld hosted a directory of pay-per-click (PPC) links on the domain, including links to Teva's competitors. Based on the nature of the PPC links, it was clear to the Panel that Dworld had registered and used the domain for its trademark value, foreclosing the possibility that its registration or use were in good faith.
Dworld contended that its use was legitimate under the UDRP Policy because the TEVA trademark is not unique and because it was inspired to register the domain by the "Teva Mountain Games," and intended to use the domain as a "fan page" for TEVA sandals. In response to Teva's UDRP complaint, Dworld quickly removed the offending PPC links and posted phony blog entries to make the website look like a fan site for TEVA shoes. The Panel found Dworld's claims of fair use implausible because, inter alia, Dworld's website "previously displayed sponsored links related to the pharmaceutical industry."
Fatal to Dworld's assertions that neither its registration nor use were in bad faith were the PPC links to Teva's competitors. The Panel wrote, "[such] evidence . . . suggests that [Dworld] selected the disputed domain name because of its association with [Teva's] trademark."
The Panel noted that "[w]here the links on a portal website are based on the trademark value of the domain name, rather than any descriptive value, the trend in decision under the [UDRP] Policy is to recognize such practices generally constitute abusive cybersquatting."
"We are pleased that the right decision was reached and hope that this decision will dissuade cybersquatters from exploiting Teva's valuable marks," said Howard J. Shire, a partner at Kenyon & Kenyon who represented Teva. "This Panel made clear that pretextual fair use will not protect cybersquatters who register domain names for their inherent trademark value."
Teva is represented by Kenyon & Kenyon LLP.
The case is
Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. v. Protected Domain Services/ Dworld c/o Basil Administrator, (WIPO Case No. D2010-0532) (May 28, 2010).
About Kenyon & Kenyon LLP
Kenyon & Kenyon is consistently ranked by peers and in-house counsel as one of the top firms for intellectual property law. Since its founding in 1879, the firm has provided its worldwide clientele with litigation, prosecution, licensing and counseling services. Large and small enterprises and individuals choose Kenyon to design and implement intellectual property strategies when it matters most. The firm has offices in New York, Washington, DC, and Silicon Valley.