.RU: From Russia Without Love


The Russian Legal Information Agency (RAPSI) is reporting that the Russian Ninth Commercial Court of Appeals will hear an appeal from Tissot, the luxury Swiss watchmaker and member of the Swatch Group, over Holmrook Limited's use of the “Tissot” trademark and the domain name Tissot.ru. Back in December, the Moscow Commercial Court ruled against Tissot on the grounds that the Tissot.ru domain was operated by an authorized third party as an informational website about the French painter, James Tissot. Tissot (the brand) contended that this content was only put on the site after it had filed its suit.

Indeed, the Court's decision does seem curious given that it had previously ruled in favor of other Swatch Group brands Rado and Longines, against Holmrook Limited, over similar trademark and domain name issues. In September 2011, for example, the court ordered the Rado.ru domain transferred to Rado and commanded that Holmrook pay out 50,000 rubles (about $1,650) to Rado in damages. Given that the Tissot suit marks the third case in which Holmrook Limited has been the defendant in domain name disputes involving Swatch Group brands, all signs seem to point towards a bad faith registration. And yet, the Russian court did not see it that way.

Unfortunately, the inconsistencies in this case are (ironically enough) quite consistent with my experience with the .RU ccTLD. The bottom line is, thanks to lax copyright enforcement and a rampant counterfeiting industry, cybersquatting flourishes in the .RU space. Compounding the problem is the lack of any kind of dispute resolution policy (DRP) for .RU domains, which leaves trademark holders with the unpalatable choice of pursuing legal action through the expensive, slow, and inconsistent Russian court system, or attempting to purchase the domain directly from the domain owner.

For brand owners, the best defense is a strong offense: I advise registering all key trademarks in the .RU domain before cybersquatters can. If you're already too late, attempt to negotiate a sale of the disputed domain with the registrant. When all else fails, try the Russian courts as Tissot is now preparing to do for a second time. I will be closely following the appeal, which the court is scheduled to hear on February 8th. 

Trackback URL for this post:

http://www.domainnamestrategy.com/trackback/305

questions

Hi Mr. Levy... I'm trying to follow up on this for a project I'm working on and am unable to come up with much additional information. Any idea what this Holmrook company does or what they were using the domain names for originally? Have they had similar legal issues with other companies or with other watchmakers outside of The Swatch Group?
If I were to publish a short story, would you mind if I quoted you?
Also, have any answers been handed down yet today? Where would I find this information?

Thanks for your time.

Allison

Re: Questions

Thank you for your comment, Allison. Unfortunately, I don't know exactly what Holmrook does. From the past lawsuits by the Swatch Group, it would seem Holmrook's main function is investing in domain names (some may call it cybersquatting instead of investing), and I view the use of content relating to the artist James Tissot to be a clever ruse which was specifically intended to avoid enforcement. It would be like someone registering apple.ru and posting pictures of fruit but with the real intention of waiting for the famous computer/mobile device company to seek out the owner and offer them a huge sum to buy the domain.

You can feel free to use my quotes in your article as you like.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.

All comments must be approved before they are made available to the public. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog and use appropriate language.