Bill Clinton Loses Battle For Domain Names

Bill Clinton's attempt to prevent Web of Deception's Joseph Culligan from using his name for a series of web URLs — williamclinton.com, williamjclinton.com, and presidentbillclinton.com — was lost this week when an arbitration panel denied the former President's complaint.

On Monday, the National Arbitration Forum ruled that, although Clinton's name can be considered a common law mark under Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), Culligan didn't register the domains in "bad faith" and thus he is allowed to maintain them.

Currently, the three domains redirect visitors to the Republican National Committee's website.

"The Panelist simply cannot find bad faith in this case," the decision reads. It continues:

None of the elements of bad faith are [sic] met. The Respondent's conduct in registering, acquiring and utilizing these domain names is simply not within the UDRP definition of bad faith. The facts alleged by Complainant are simply unpersuasive. Evidence of bad faith (i) requires a showing that the names were registered or acquired for the purpose of selling or transferring the name to the mark holder; (ii) in order to prevent the mark holder from registering the domain; (iii) to disrupt a competitor's business; or (iv) to attract Internet users by confusing them. The only one of these that could possibly apply is (ii), which requires a showing of a pattern of conduct. While Respondent's conduct in registering the names of politicians does reflect a pattern, Respondent has adequately rebutted any inference of bad faith.

Culligan has also registered domains using the names of Barack Obama and John McCain.

Comments

[chromodynamics]

"(iv) to attract Internet users by confusing them." and "Currently, the three domains redirect visitors to the Republican National Committee's website." speak volumes on how stupid the National Arbitration Forum adjudicators must be. Since when would anyone using Domain names like williamclinton.com, williamjclinton.com, and presidentbillclinton.com expect the RNC's web site to show up?

[whiteboyblues]

The RNC sucks ba11s

[JustinKase]

They just keep finding dubious ways to score, don't they??

[stop the politics]

It was a bad ruling. But the idea of redirecting people from billclinton.com to the RNC site is pretty fun. Who knew Republicans had that in them?

[tydicea]

You appear to be naive, in the real world of computing being redirected to a website you had no intention of going is called hi-jacking. Furthermore, the RNC/GOP has shown repeated there is no depths to which the would not stoop.

[wingsabre]

Two can play that game. Somewhere out there, republican domain names are being snatched up, and they're being directed to gay porn sites.

[steamboat]

I thought Larry Craig's name already was.

[bestealth]

that'll save em a few clicks

[solarian]

bill needs to talk to cern about this

[steamboat]

I'm neither President Clinton's biggest fan, nor his biggest critic.....Hey, I'm a moderate/conservative libertarian. So I DON"T drink the Clinton koolaid.....But I think the way I read this, this is a 'dirty trick' against the former President. I realize BOTH party's are known to play rough, but to me, this crosses that fine line.

[theubermensch]

So then you do drink the Clinton kool-aid and what kool aid will you idiots get off of this kool-aid thing. No one drinks kool- aid anymore.

[RoadCrossingChicken]

I agree with you. He is not my favorite human being, but this is just so wrong. Perhaps some middle school student with too much time on his hands can do a little hacking on the sites.

[solarian]

sounds like web squating

[ObamacratInCA]

So this sets a legal precedent for the leading Republican presidential candidates to be redirected to Planned Parenthood.

[ibsteve2u]

"Currently, the three domains redirect visitors to the Republican National Committee's website."

On the bright side, when browsing for things Clinton, hitting one of those URLs and being shocked by the contrast with what you expected is sure to leave the visitor thinking better of Bill.

Rather like when you go to change a baby's diaper, and expect a certain mess but are instead surprised to find out that the mashed peas way didn't agree with him or her.

[Spitzerhopper]

Something tells me Joseph Culligan will either soon jump out of a high-rise window or else suicide himself with multiple gunshots to the back of the cranium.

[TimeToPunt]

...in which case his heirs and assigns will get those domain names.

[RoadCrossingChicken]

Hmmm... perhaps the authorities should look to you for an answer should that happen.

[kristianidol]

Wow, what a bad ruling. The only one that DOESN'T apply is (i), "for the purpose of selling or transferring". What, is the Arbitration Forum all Republicans??

[flamenco]

Hmmmm... it's obvious squatting and misdirection. I'm not always in favor of big guy beats little guy, but these circumstances warrant it.

Judge must not like Bill. It could be as silly as that.

[terriertribe]

Odd. I would think that all the elements of bad faith except (i) are clearly present.
(ii) prevent the mark holder from registering the domain -- even the Panelist agrees.
(iii) disrupt a competitor's business -- Clinton needs to develop a new brand name; that's not disruptive?
(iv) attract Internet users by confusing them. -- I always type in billclinton.com when I want to go to the RNC site, doesn't everyone?

[YewNeekId]

poor bill can't get everything that he wants...

[amdezurik]

oh how sweet of you to cheer on the RNC ly.ing some more! Will Flushie come to your house and give you a big wet kiss?

[audadvnc]

This is also known as Internet Squatting - like grabbing www.pepsicola.com - but for political extortion rather than financial.