WIPO domain disputes › RDNH findings › D2016-1024
D2016-1024: RDNH finding over moonjuice.com
On 12 July 2016, a WIPO panel declared that Moon Juice Ventures, LLC brought its complaint over moonjuice.com in bad faith, the finding known as reverse domain name hijacking (RDNH). The complaint was denied, so the registrant kept the name.
The domain name was registered on 23 July 1998, 17.8 years before the complaint was filed.
The record
| WIPO case | D2016-1024 |
|---|---|
| Domain name | moonjuice.com |
| Complainant | Moon Juice Ventures, LLC |
| Decision date | 12 July 2016 |
| Outcome (WIPO) | Complaint denied |
| How the finding appears | declared in the operative decision |
| Panelist | Payne, Alistair |
| Panel | Sole panelist |
| Complainant represented | Yes |
| Respondent | Self-represented |
| Domain registered | 23 July 1998 |
| Complaint filed | 21 May 2016 |
The panel’s finding
For the foregoing reasons, the Complaint is denied. The Respondent has sought a finding of reverse domain name hijacking against the Complainant. For the reasons set out above, it seems to the Panel that this Complaint was brought in order to obtain a domain name that the Respondent had bona fide registered many years prior to the commencement of the Complainant's business or the registration of its trade mark. Following the Respondent's refusal of the Complainant's offer to purchase of the disputed domain name the Complainant still attempted to obtain the disputed domain name by filing this Complaint under the Policy in circumstances that there was clearly no registration in bad faith, or evidence of targeting of the Complainant by the Respondent. As a result there was no reasonable basis on which the Complaint could succeed and the Panel finds that this Complaint amounts to a case of ...
Read the decision on WIPO · WIPO case record
Affiliate disclosure: this page contains affiliate links (Dynadot and Spaceship). I may earn a commission from qualifying purchases made through them. The WIPO links are not affiliate links.
How the RDNH archive is built
WIPO publishes every panel decision and a full-text search over them. This archive starts from that search for the wording a panel uses when it declares reverse domain name hijacking, reads each decision in full (older ones are web pages, newer ones PDFs converted to text), and keeps those where the panel itself says the complaint was brought in bad faith. A finding is marked declared in the operative decision when the final order says so, or found in the panel’s reasoning when only the reasoning does.
The reading is automatic and has been checked by hand on samples, but it is not exhaustive and not perfect: some findings may be missing, and a few listed cases may be borderline. A case is listed only when the panel’s own closing words can be quoted cleanly; decisions with an irregular layout, or not written in English, are held back. Every page links to the decision on WIPO, which is the authority. Dates, parties and panellists come from WIPO’s case records. Respondents are not named.
This is an information resource, not legal advice. A finding of RDNH is a panel’s conclusion about one complaint, not a statement about the company beyond that case.
