The UDRP case regarding DREAMLINES.COM


Dreamlines GmbH found Guilty Of Reverse Domain Name Highjacking on 19 year old domain name

  Dreamlines GmbH loses UDRP case in its attempt to unfairly grab 19 year old domain name.

The WIPO panelist found Dreamlines GmbH to be Reverse Domain Name Hijackers.

The domain holder registered the domain name back in 1997.

By the Complainant's own admission: "The Complainant is a German limited liability company registered in 2009 which has operated a “Dreamlines” branded Internet platform to promote and market international travel agency services specializing in cruise voyages since 2011."


The WIPO panelist stated:

"In the Panel’s view, there is no way that as at the date of creation of the disputed domain name the Respondent could have contemplated the Complainant’s then non-existence and its then non-existent rights"


"The Panel notes that the Complaint was launched following the Complainant’s unsuccessful attempt to purchase a domain name that cannot be considered to have been registered in bad faith given the significant extent to which its creation date pre-dates the Complainant’s registered trademark and even the existence of the Complainant itself. On those facts alone, this case might be considered to be a typical example of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

The Panel is satisfied that the Complainant must or at least ought to have appreciated at the outset that its complaint could not likely succeed."

The ruling on the case (Dreamlines GmbH v. Darshinee Naidu / World News Inc) can be found at WIPO Case No. D2016-0111


In deciding that Dreamlines GmbH was guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, the panelist's conclusion sums up by saying:

"In all of these circumstances, the Panel finds that the Complaint was brought in bad faith in an attempt at Reverse Domain Name Hijacking and constitutes an abuse of the administrative proceeding."


There are news stories about the domain name UDRP case on "Dreamlines GmbH is a reverse domain name hijacker" and "Reverse domain name hijacking found where Respondent’s registration of domain name preceded Complainant’s trademark rights by 14 years."

There are numerous sources for "Reverse Domain Name Hijacking".  Amongst these are and (which includes a current list of those found guilty of trying to Reverse Hijack a Domain Name in which they had no legal rights. In other words they tried to bully the rightful owners into relinquishing their property and forcing these innocent parties to spend thousands to defend what they already own).

See also Does the UDRP do more harm than good? and The UDRP: A Problem at the Core of the Internet


Back to (Quality Logo Products failed UDRP)