11th Circuit Affirms District Court Ruling Against Cruise Traffic's Royal Caribbean Domains Squatting

Caribbean filed an in rem lawsuit against Cruise Traffic under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, claiming Cruise Traffic used the two domain names to “wrongfully profit” from the cruise line’s reputation. The Jacksonville court granted a default judgment against Cruise Traffic when Royal Caribbean’s notice to the address for Jai George, the domains’ original listed registrant, went undelivered because the address included on registration documents was no longer correct. Royal Caribbean also attempted to contact Bindu Joseph, George’s sister-in-law, to whom George transferred registration of the domains. Cruise Traffic appealed, claiming the Jacksonville court didn’t have in rem jurisdiction and Royal Caribbean didn’t exercise due diligence in its attempts to contact Joseph. A three-judge 11th Circuit panel ruled per curiam that the Jacksonville court was correct in saying “Royal Caribbean would be prejudiced by the continued use of the Domain Names. This determination was supported by evidence the Domain Names diverted customers attempting to book cruises directly through Royal Caribbean to third-party agents, to whom Royal Caribbean then paid a commission. In other words, Royal Caribbean incurred additional expenses due to the use of the Domain Names.” Judges Lanier Anderson, Stanley Marcus and Beverly Martin heard the case. They panel ruled that the Jacksonville court did have jurisdiction and said it was “unpersuaded” by Cruise Traffic’s claim that Royal Caribbean didn’t exercise proper due diligence. “Royal Caribbean did all that it was required by statute when it sent notice to Joseph via mail and email and published notice,” the 11th Circuit said in its opinion. It said Cruise Traffic couldn't be considered a “registrant or authorized licensee” because that issue was not raised at the Jacksonville court. Royal Caribbean and Cruise Traffic didn’t comment.