The address was not transferred to it because the owner claimed
that he had never heard of the magazine when he registered the
name.
The site simply carries a picture of Alan Greenspan, the former
chairman of the US Federal Reserve, and a note calling him 'the
economist of the century'.
The Economist took a case under the World Intellectual Property
Organisation (WIPO)'s dispute resolution service. Under WIPO rules
a domain name can only be transferred if the name is identical or
confusingly similar to a trade or service mark owned by the body
trying to gain control of the address; if the person holding the
address has no rights in it, and if the address was registered and
used in bad faith.
Anyone hoping to gain control of a domain must prove all three
of these elements in order to be handed the address. The Economist
failed to show that the address owner Jason Rose registered the
domain name in bad faith.
Rose claimed that he had never heard of The Economist in 1996.
The Economist disputed this, claiming it would be almost impossible
for someone interested in current affairs and economics not to know
the magazine, but WIPO panelist Sir Ian Barker, a QC, said that he
had to be believed.
Barker said that the claim was hard to believe, but that the
WIPO system was not designed for ruling on such questions of
fact.
"The Panel cannot find bad faith registration proved on the
balance of probabilities," he wrote in his judgment. "Despite the
Panel’s misgivings about the credibility of his claim, this
proceeding under the Policy is not the proper forum for testing its
validity more than 11 years after the domain name was
registered."
"The only way that Mr. Rose’s assertions can be tested is in
litigation where a judge would have proper opportunity of assessing
the quality of this evidence. A proceeding under the Policy is not
the proper forum for determining such a belated issue of fact," he
said.
It was found that Rose had no legitimate rights or interests in
the term The Economist, and that he was using the address in bad
faith. Panelist Barker even said he was "highly sceptical and
almost incredulous" about some of Rose's claims. "His statements
generally appear somewhat self-serving," he said.
But because it could not be proved that Rose had knowledge of
The Economist in 1996 and that it was therefore a registration in
bad faith, the domain name remained with Rose.
