WGCZ S.R.O., the operator of tube site Xnxx.com, had asked a three-judge WIPO arbitration panel that Xxnx.com was cybersquatting on its adult tube site brand and that it wanted the domain transferred over because it was allegedly registered in bad faith.
WGCZ S.R.O. said it has had control of the site since 2002 and that it has held a trademark for "Xnxx" in conjunction with online adult entertainment since 2013.
But Xxnx.com operator Murat Yikilmaz, who resides in Istanbul, argued that the disputed domain name was registered before any trademark rights arose — in 2002 — and that he wasn't trying to take advantage of the potential for confusion.
In fact, he noted that he holds other three- and four-letter domain names such as Xxxf.com and Xxxl.com. The domain in contention, Xxnx.com, provides links to other adult entertainment websites as a pay-per-click site.
Yikilmaz further said that he had evidence of a previous purchase attempt of the domain in an email inquiry dating from 2005 that came from an email address within the complainant's Xnxx.com domain name.
With the evidence in hand, Yikilmaz had asked the panel for a finding of reverse domain name hijacking alleging vexatious prosecution of the complaint and lack of disclosure of a purported previous attempt to purchase the disputed domain name.
The panel, however, declined to make such a finding, but also ruled against the action by Xxnx.com's operator, WGCZ S.R.O., to take over the site.
"[T]he evidence is insufficient to show that the despondent registered the disputed domain name either in awareness of the complainant or in order to take advantage of any potential for confusion between the disputed domain name and any rights held by the complainant, whether potential or actual at that time," the panel wrote.