UDRP ruling: why did the defendant in the Abnormal.ai domain win?

In a recent UDRP (Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy) case, the registrant of Abnormal.ai was successful in repelling a domain name transfer request from Abnormal Security Corporation. The case was heard by a three-member panel of the Forum (NAF), which ultimately ruled against the transfer of the domain name to the Complainant. The details of the case and the reasons for the decision are set out below:

Background of the Case

Abnormal Security Corporation (“Complainant”) argued that the domain name Abnormal.ai infringed their trademark rights and requested that the domain name be transferred to them. The Complainant claimed that the domain name was too similar to its trademark and was likely to cause confusion. The Respondent, Narendra Ghimire (“Respondent”), argued that the domain name consists of a generic dictionary term and that it was registered and used in full compliance with the Rules.

Key points of the decision

1. The generic nature of the domain name:

The Panel noted that the domain name Abnormal.ai contains the word “abnormal”, which is a common generic dictionary term. Prior to the registration of the domain name, the domain name was registered and allowed to expire by another entity, and the Respondent then legally acquired the domain name through an auction. The Respondent was unaware of the Complainant's existence prior to the registration of the domain name.

2. Confusing Trademarks and Domain Names:

Although the Complainant asserts that its mark “ABNORMAL” is distinctive, the Panel finds that the Complainant has not provided sufficient evidence that its mark is well known in the relevant field. Therefore, the Panel decides that the similarity between the domain name and the trademark is not sufficient to constitute confusion. In particular, the .ai suffix is commonly understood as a mark in the field of “artificial intelligence” and not directly related to the Complainant's business.

3. Rights and Legitimate Interests:

The Panel recognizes that the Respondent has a legitimate interest in the domain name Abnormal.ai, as the domain name itself consisted of generic terms when the Respondent acquired it in the domain name auction. The Complainant has failed to establish that the Respondent acted in bad faith in registering or using the domain name.

4. Bad faith registration and use:

The Decision finds that the purchase of a domain name consisting of generic dictionary words does not constitute a registration in bad faith. The Complainant also failed to provide evidence that the Respondent intended to use the domain name in bad faith.

5.Reverse Domain Name Hijacking:

Although the Complainant's case is weak, the Panel finds that the Complainant's motivation for bringing the action was not entirely bad faith. Therefore, no indication of reverse domain name hijacking was found.

Final Decision

As the Complainant failed to fulfill all three elements required by the UDRP, the Panel decides to retain the domain name Abnormal.ai in the Respondent's possession. This decision demonstrates the balance between the right to use generic dictionary words and trademark rights in domain name disputes.