In a domain name battle that has generated widespread attention, a dispute between two Texas pool construction companies has led to a Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) case. The case involved a dispute between Pools123 Houston LLC over Pools123Texas.com, a domain name registered by Aquamarine Pools of Texas.

At issue is a Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) complaint filed by Pools123Houston LLC. Despite the fact that there has been a business relationship between Complainant and Respondent for many years, Complainant has failed to fully disclose this in its filings. To further complicate matters, Respondent has provided evidence that they owned the Pools123.com domain name long before Complainant registered the POOLS123 trademark. In response, Complainant's counsel argued that their client was the registrant, triggering further scrutiny by the Panel.
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) panel found indications of reverse domain name hijacking during its proceedings. In its decision, the Panel stated: “Given what appears to be a long history of dealings between the Complainant and its client and the Respondent, the Complainant has failed to honestly disclose this relationship. The Complainant has not acknowledged the existence of business dealings between the parties, nor has it acknowledged that the Respondent's 'pools123.com' website existed long before they registered the POOLS123 trademark. Complainant's failure to withdraw the complaint within the mutually agreed upon suspension period resulted in Respondent having to expend significant resources defending the false complaint.”
Chamberlain Hrdlicka represented the Complainant in this case and ESQwire.com PC provided legal support to the domain name owner. The Panel's decision not only sheds light on the legal complexities involved in domain name contests, but also highlights the need for transparency and honesty when dealing with similar cases.