Virgin boss wins control of "embarrassing" porn web address Under the rules governing .xxx, anyone registering an address and actually using it rather than just protecting their trademark must be involved in the pornography industry. Mr Truman registered richardbranson.xxx in December, but told the NAF "that he is not involved in the sex or pornography industry, and that he does not have connections with that industry." The address served up "parking page with links to adult entertainment related websites," which Mr Truman made no money from. He said he registered it as a "souvenir." In his evidence, Mr Truman argued that he should be allowed to keep the address because the name Richard Branson was "neither unique nor unusual" and that Sir Richard had had "ample opportunity" to register the address himself. The NAF however found that because Mr Truman claimed no connection to the pornography industry that he "impliedly admits in his papers that he has no rights in the domain name." It also said Sir Richard had provided evidence he had common law, although not registered, rights to the trademark "Richard Branson," regardless of whether it is an unusual name. Nick Fox, a spokesman for Sir Richard, said: "Virgin Group treats the use of its and Sir Richard's name on the web very seriously and we ensure that there are no unauthorised sites operating that will confuse customers. ICANN has ordered the transfer of the richardbranson.xxx domain name to Virgin. We are pleased with the outcome of this dispute. Once transferred to Virgin Group, richardbranson.xxx will no longer display a web page. Dr David Taylor, a partner at the law firm Hogan Lovells, said the dispute could have been avoided. "When there are mechanisms in place to protect brands and celebrities, brands and celebrities need to ensure that they are aware of them and use them," he said. The case may not have gone in favour of Richard Branson for a number of reasons. It appears that he did not nor could not rely upon registered trade mark rights in 'Richard Branson' as he does not have any. Other celebrities have not fared so well. The well-known rock singer Sting did not necessarily have rights in the name 'Sting' as a trademark simply because he was well-known by that name. Bruce Springsteen also failed in bringing a successful case [over a web address].