subjects Respondent to Network Solutions’ dispute settlement policy, the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, as adopted by ICANN on August 26, 1999, and with implementing documents approved by ICANN on October 24, 1999. Complainant subsequently acknowledged that the USPTO had initially refused registration, but asserts that it intends to respond to the "non-final" action.
The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy") requires that domain name registrants submit to a mandatory administrative proceeding conducted by an approved dispute resolution service provider, of which WIPO is one, regarding allegations of abusive domain name registration (Policy, para. It states that "[i]t is the intention of the Complainant to secure its rights in its intellectual property of ‘.sex’".
“The property of the bankruptcy estate is defined in 11 U. The Ninth Circuit and the Second Circuit have specifically held that a trustee lacks the right to distribute a telephone number as property of the estate, see Rothman v.
Metropolitan Alarm Corp., 528 F.2d 908, 910 n.1 (1st Cir. Furthermore, even if Alexandria International did have possessory interests in the use of the telephone numbers and web addresses, those interests were the product of executory contracts with Cox Communications that were irrevocably rejected by the trustee before the estate was reopened.
Respondent also transmitted its Response to Complainant. Each panelist had previously transmitted to WIPO an executed Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence ("Statement and Declaration").
Respondent elected to have this proceeding decided by a three-member panel.(g) In e-mail correspondence with WIPO between August 21 and August 27, 2001, Complainant queried whether it was entitled to file a reply to the Response submitted by Respondent, and objected to Respondent’s request for a three-member panel on grounds that Respondent had not replied to the Complaint within the time limits established by the Policy. WIPO notified the Panel that, absent exceptional circumstances, it would be required to forward its decision to WIPO by October 16, 2001.
On July 13, 2000, WIPO transmitted a Request for Registrar Verification to the registrar, Network Solutions, Inc.
76223416, dated March 12, 2001, in International Class 38, covering "domain name registry".
The Debtor argued that the domain name and phone numbers sold to ACG at auction were not the debtor’s property, and therefore could not be properly sold as part of the bankruptcy estate.
“Appellant further argues that even if the sale of Alexandria International’s assets to ACG was valid, the sale of the web address and telephone numbers was improper because neither were the property of the bankruptcy estate (and therefore neither could be sold by the trustee). § 541(a)(1) as “all legal and equitable interests of the debtor in property as of the commencement of the estate.” With respect to the status of telephone numbers, there is a split of authority among the circuits.
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISIONDomain Name Systems, Inc. The registrar of the disputed domain name is Network Solutions, Inc., with business address in Herndon, Virginia, USA. Procedural History The essential procedural history of the administrative proceeding is as follows:(a) The Complainant initiated the proceeding by the filing of a Complaint via e-mail, received by the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ("WIPO") on July 10, 2001, and by courier mail received by WIPO on July 18, 2001.
The Respondent is TBS Industries, with address in Newport Beach, California, USA. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is .