By Alex Athans, Legal TeamA recent decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorodo, Biomedical Technology Solutions, Inc. v. www .demolizer .com, held that email service of process is appropriate when there is no other way to contact the domain owner. In this case, defendant Suresh Shottam, a resident of India, registered the domain “www.demolizer.com.” Plaintiff, Biomedical Technology Solutions, owner of the “Demolizer” trademark, wished to acquire the domain and contacted Shottam by email. Shottam never responded, and Biomedical Technology Solutions sued the domain name in rem,where as the property instead of the person is the main object of action, per the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA). Biomedical Technology Solutions emailed the defendant a copy of the complaint, but received no response. Judge Wiley Y. Daniel held that email service of process was sufficient because there was no other practicable way to contact Shottam. The court entered default judgment against Shottam, and the domain was transferred to Biomedical Technology Solutions.
Under the ACPA, a plaintiff may file an in rem action against a domain name in the domain registrar’s jurisdiction if the domain owner is not subject to the jurisdiction of any U.S. court. The court relied on case law holding that email service is appropriate when it’s the method of service most likely to reach the defendant. The court also relied on evidence that Shottam had previously responded to email complaints sent to the email address Biomedical Technology Solutions sent its complaint to.
Source: Sedo.com -- Reprinted with permission -- September 9, 2008