Following a procedure administered by the National Arbitration Forum, the domain name ihatedell.com was transferred to the complainant, Dell Inc. Contrary to what one might imagine, the decision is unrelated to freedom of expression.
First, the ihatedell.com site had nothing to do with any criticism of Dell, Inc., or its products since it was related to pornographic content. Second, the respondent considered himself as a victim of identity theft. Having presumably nothing against Dell, Inc., he did not object to the transfer of the domain name ( NAF, FA2001001880790, Dell Inc. v. Jason Hoad , February 28, 2020).
From memory, there were cases of cybersquatting in which the alleged domain name holder tried to have a third party take the blame. One should also mention the case in which the disputed domain name had been purchased with a stolen credit card, as a result of which the owner of the said credit card had been implicated.
These anecdotes are part of the folklore of UDRP decisions, which sometimes make us smile. However, they also consolidate the idea of strengthening the procedures for identifying domain name holders.
