## Facts

- Friends of Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, a Maryland political committee, filed a UDRP complaint seeking transfer of five domain names incorporating “Kennedy Townsend” and “Kathleen Kennedy Townsend.”
- The respondent, an individual in Maryland, was the registrant of the disputed domain names, which were active and subject to the UDRP through the listed registrars.
- A prior UDRP proceeding over the same domain names had been brought by Kathleen Kennedy Townsend personally and was dismissed for failure to prove her name functioned as a trademark or service mark under the UDRP.
- Friends asserted it held common-law rights in the name “Kathleen Kennedy Townsend” based on a claimed license from Townsend to use her name for political fundraising, promotional activity, and domain name registration.
- Friends relied on evidence of public recognition and media references to Townsend as a prominent Maryland political figure and member of the Kennedy family.
- The respondent opposed the complaint, disputing Friends’ standing and trademark rights and asserting the case was an improper attempt to relitigate issues decided in the earlier proceeding.
- A three-member administrative panel was appointed after the respondent requested a three-member panel.

## Issues

1. Whether the complaint should be entertained as a permissible refiling after an earlier UDRP dismissal involving the same domain names and the same asserted personal-name mark.
2. Whether the complainant proved rights in a trademark or service mark in “Kathleen Kennedy Townsend” sufficient to satisfy UDRP ¶ 4(a)(i).
3. Whether a politician’s personal name, primarily associated with political identity and electoral activity, falls within the UDRP’s trademark-focused scope absent proof of commercial exploitation as a mark.

## Decision

- The panel denied the complaint and declined to order transfer of any disputed domain name.
- The panel held the complainant failed to establish trademark or service mark rights in “Kathleen Kennedy Townsend” under UDRP ¶ 4(a)(i).
- The panel concluded that protection of an individual politician’s name, without a demonstrated connection to commercial exploitation as a mark, is outside the scope of the UDRP.
- Because the complainant failed on the first element, the panel did not make detailed determinations on the respondent’s rights or legitimate interests or on bad-faith registration and use.

## Legal Principles

- A UDRP complainant must prove the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; fame or name recognition alone does not establish such rights.
- Common-law trademark rights require evidence that the claimed designation functions as a source identifier for goods or services (e.g., trademark-like use and secondary meaning), not merely political prominence.
- UDRP relief is directed to abusive domain registrations implicating trademark rights; it is not a general mechanism for securing control over personal names, particularly in political contexts, absent proof of commercial mark use.
- Refiled UDRP complaints are generally considered only in narrow circumstances (e.g., materially new evidence or a significant defect in the prior proceeding); repeating substantially the same case weighs against relief.

## Conclusion

The panel denied transfer because the political committee did not prove trademark or service mark rights in “Kathleen Kennedy Townsend,” and the UDRP was deemed inapplicable to claims seeking control of a politician’s personal name absent clear evidence of commercial exploitation as a mark.


Friends of Kathleen Kennedy Townsend v. B.G. Birt, WIPO Case No. D2002-0451 (WIPO Arb. & Mediation Ctr. July 31, 2002)