The curious case of Jiohotstar.com domain, Marketing & Advertising News, ET BrandEquity

representative imageThe JioHotstar domain saga took an intriguing twist last Saturday as news broke that UAE-based siblings now hold the keys to jiohotstar.com. This dispute has ignited a whirlwind of legal discussions around cybersquatting and trademark rights. Initially secured by a Delhi-based developer in September 2023, the domain was registered amid swirling speculation about a potential merger between Reliance’s Jio and Disney’s Hotstar.

With ambitions of selling the domain for Rs 1 crore to fund his education, the developer’s intentions quickly raised eyebrows over potential bad faith registration. Yet, the unexpected transfer of the domain to siblings Jainam and Jivika adds a captivating layer to the narrative, challenging established norms of trademark protection and domain ownership.

Legal experts assert that this unfolding drama not only puts the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) to the test but also illuminates the fine line between legitimate domain acquisitions and opportunistic cybersquatting in our increasingly digital world.

According to Akshat Pande, managing partner at Alpha Partners, the situation with the jiohotstar.com domain appears to be a case of cybersquatting. This involves registering a domain name with the intent to sell it to the legitimate brand owner for profit. “Domain names are considered trademarks under the law and can be protected through alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods provided by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) or the .in registry, as well as through normal trademark law. ADR is a quick, cost-effective way to compel cybersquatters to relinquish rights to infringing domain names,” Pande stated.

Regarding the unexpected ownership of the domain by UAE siblings, Pande expressed skepticism, noting that WHOIS details show the domain is registered to a US company acting as a proxy, rather than the siblings. “It seems someone has used the names of these children to divert attention or confuse the actual owner,” he added. WHOIS is a query and response protocol used to look up information about registered domain names.

In a recent video uploaded on the Jiohotstar.com website, siblings Jainam and Jivika stated that they purchased the domain to support the Delhi developer in funding his education. This development has sparked numerous news articles suggesting that, since the children are based in the UAE, it may be challenging for Reliance to pursue legal action effectively.

With Jainam and Jivika now in possession of the domain, Reliance may need to rethink its strategy, according to Kunal Sharma, Partner at Singhania & Co. He noted, “The siblings have expressed that their acquisition was intended to support the developer and that they plan to transform the domain into an inspirational platform. This shift in ownership complicates Reliance’s potential UDRP claim, as the new owners may argue that their acquisition was in good faith and with no intent to exploit any future trademark.”

However, Sharma cautioned that Reliance could still argue that the initial registration was made in bad faith. The transfer to another party may not shield the domain from UDRP scrutiny. “The UDRP’s flexibility on intent suggests that even secondary acquisitions might not protect domains initially registered under questionable motives. If Reliance considers jiohotstar.com crucial to its brand identity, it could assert that the original bad-faith intent remains relevant, regardless of subsequent ownership changes.”

Sharma also views this situation as a classic case of cybersquatting. The UDRP, managed by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), offers trademark owners a way to reclaim domains without resorting to court. “To succeed under the UDRP, three conditions must be met: the domain must be identical or confusingly similar to a registered trademark, the registrant must have no legitimate interest in the domain, and the domain must have been registered and used in bad faith,” he explained.

For the siblings, maintaining that their acquisition was genuine, with no intent to misuse the domain, could serve as a key defense. Sharma noted that since the UDRP often focuses on the registrant’s intentions, Jainam and Jivika might assert their lack of commercial intent, citing their plan to use the platform for educational purposes. “If they can convince a UDRP panel or a court of the non-commercial, educational intent of their acquisition, they may strengthen their claim to retain the domain. However, they might face challenges if Reliance insists on trademark rights tied to the ‘Jio’ brand.”

Experts highlight that this case underscores the UDRP’s complexity in differentiating between legitimate acquisitions and attempts to evade cybersquatting claims through ownership transfers. While ICANN policies typically favor trademark rights, the UDRP panel or a court will need to consider the developer’s original intentions, the siblings’ motivations, and the evolving ownership status of the domain in their assessment.

“Determining whether this case constitutes opportunistic cybersquatting or genuine speculation remains a central challenge,” mentioned Sharma. He noted that while speculative domain purchases are common, ICANN and UDRP policies typically favor trademark owners, especially when registration is primarily aimed at resale for profit. This underscores the evolving complexities in balancing trademark rights and domain name ownership.

Supporting this view, Sanjay Sethiya, Partner at Law Square, emphasized that trademark law does not protect individuals who deliberately exploit someone else’s well-established reputation. He argued that there is no justification for allowing continued illegitimate use of a renowned name, particularly when it pertains to goods or services unrelated to the original products that built that reputation.

In today’s interconnected digital age, Sethiya pointed out that the reputation and goodwill of domain names extend beyond borders. “This means that trans-border reputation is becoming increasingly important, no longer restricting domain names to their place of origin,” he stated. He added that trademark laws safeguard this trans-border reputation, making it easier to pursue infringement actions against identical or similar marks encountered in multinational markets. Together, these insights highlight the critical need to protect established trademarks in a globalized digital landscape.

• Published On Oct 29, 2024 at 10:45 PM IST

Join the community of 2M+ industry professionals

Subscribe to our newsletter to get latest insights & analysis.

Download ETBrandEquity App

• Get Realtime updates
• Save your favourite articles

Scan to download App