There is a difference, of course, between asserting a claim that cannot possibly succeed in an administrative proceeding under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) and being unprepared to prove a claim that may have merit with the right evidence; but there is also an overlapping similarity in that complainants are either shockingly […]
Archive | Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act
Revisiting Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
By Gerald M. Levine on December 17, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
The conduct that reverse domain name hijacking (RDNH) was crafted to punish is “using the [Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy] in bad faith to attempt to deprive a registered domain-name holder of a domain name.” There are several variations ranging from the plain vanilla, claims that should never have been brought—mark owners whose rights […]
Challenging Domain Names for Abusive Registration: UDRP and ACPA
By Gerald M. Levine on November 1, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
There are predatory-domain name registrants; and there are registrants engaged in the legitimate business of acquiring, monetizing, and reselling domain names. That there are more of the first than the second is evident from proceedings under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). “Given the human capacity for mischief in all its forms, the […]
Dead Ends: The Achievement of Consensus in UDRP Jurisprudence
By Gerald M. Levine on October 1, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
Like the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) is consensus driven; from the bottom up, not the top down. The result is a jurisprudence of domain names that develops in common law fashion through Panel decisions that over time and through “deliberative conversations” among panelists […]
Recovering Domain Names Lost to Fraudulent Transfer
By Gerald M. Levine on August 29, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
Domain Names composed of generic terms and combinations–dictionary words, random letters, and short strings–have achieved ascending values in the secondary market. DNJournal.com (Ron Jackson) reports on his year to date chart, for example (just a random sampling from the charts) in August 2019 <joyride.com> was sold for $300,000, in June <voice.com> sold for $30 million, […]
Satisfying the Evidentiary Demands of the UDRP
By Gerald M. Levine on August 12, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
It continues to surprise that some counsel in proceedings under the Uniform Domain Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) are unaware or oblivious of its evidentiary demands, by which I mean they file and certify complaints with insufficient evidence either of their clients’ rights or their claims. Because the UDRP requires conjunctive proof of bad faith registration […]
The Question of Fairness in UDRP Decision-Making
By Gerald M. Levine on July 15, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
In disputes under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) parties should be able to rely on Panels delivering predictable, consistent, and legally reasoned decisions. In large measure, this depends on Panels analyzing the facts objectively through a neutral lens and applying principles of law consistent with the jurisprudence. But the results are not […]
Words and Descriptive Phrases as Trademarks Registered as Domain Names
By Gerald M. Levine on June 24, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
In a trademark context, who owns or controls, or would prevent others, from using words and phrases commonly available to speakers in a language community, is in persistent tension. While common words alone or combined may become protected from infringing uses under trademark law, their protection is contingent on factors such as linguistic choices and […]
UDRP Complaint: Actually, a Motion for Summary Judgment
By Gerald M. Levine on May 3, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
This essay expands a talk presented at the 27th Fordham International IP Conference on April 26, 2019. Trademark owners (and here I’m talking about those with U.S. registrations even if they are foreign entities) have a choice of forum for challenging alleged cybersquatting domain names. They can either sue in district court under the Anticybersquatting […]
Credibility and Disbelievablity as it Affects Outcomes in UDRP Proceedings
By Gerald M. Levine on April 4, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
“Credibility” in English comes through Middle French from a Latin word signifying trustworthiness and reliability in business and personal transactions (allegations, contentions, statements, promises, etc.). Where the goal is persuasion, exaggerating, embellishing, withholding, and falsifying evidence or accusing the adverse party of some heinous crime is not a winning strategy for proving claims or defenses. […]
Dictionary Words Alone or Combined Functioning as Trademarks are no Less Dictionary Words
By Gerald M. Levine on February 24, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
By definition “[a]ny word” or “any combination [of words]” can function as trademarks, but whether alone or combined for that purpose no use can overrule their ordinary meanings, support their removal from the public domain, or prevent speculation or use of identical or confusingly similar words by businesses other than rights holders. The fact is, […]
Noteworthy Domain Name Decisions for 2019
By Gerald M. Levine on February 5, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
Noteworthy Domain Name Decisions is a running collection of annual decisions that taken together provide insight into the jurisprudence applied in UDRP disputes. More detailed analytical discussions of decisions can be found in recent and archived essays posted on this website and republished on circleid.com. Noteworthy Domain Decisions for 2015 can be found here, 2016 […]
Prudential Settlements for Alleged Cybersquatting/Reverse Domain Name Hijacking Under the ACPA
By Gerald M. Levine on January 22, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
Given the number of awards endlessly arriving from Panels appointed to decide cybersquatting disputes under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) (ten to fifteen published daily) the sum total of grievants filing de novo challenges under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protect Act (ACPA) is remarkably small — one or two at most in any […]
Typosquatting as Per Se Cybersquatting Unless Proved Otherwise
By Gerald M. Levine on January 7, 2019 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
The quintessence of typosquatting is syntactical variation: adding, omitting, replacing, substituting, and transposing words and letters. Recent examples include <citizens1loans> (numeral for word), <shiippco.com> (double vowels), <airfrances.com> (pluralizing/possessive), and (reversing letters), and <amazøn.com> (look carefully at the letter following “z”). Since these minor variations are mostly indefensible, respondents rarely respond to complaints, although as I […]
Drawing Inferences from the Record: UDRP/URS Decision-Making
By Gerald M. Levine on December 10, 2018 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
The weighing of evidence involves the connecting of dots, which involves drawing inferences. However, just as there can be false positives, there can be false inferences. The tendency may be to think of inferences as coming in one size, but not all inferences are logically correct. Some are weak and others strong. The reason for […]
Abusive Conduct: Domain Name Registrants and Rights Holders
By Gerald M. Levine on November 25, 2018 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
Abusive conduct or cybersquatting is the essence of disputes under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), usually by domain name registrants violating their warranties of registration but also (in appreciable numbers) by trademark holders overreaching their statutory rights. The UDRP remedies are asynchronous: there is forfeiture of offending domain names; for abusive use […]
Remedies for Cybersquatting: New gTLD Domain Names
By Gerald M. Levine on October 2, 2018 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
In the discussions proceeding the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) publishing The Management Of Internet Names And Addresses: Intellectual Property Issues (Final Report, April 30, 1999) that ultimately led to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) implementing the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) (1999) commentators considered three remedies to combat […]
Undone! Failure of Persuasion in UDRP Proceedings
By Gerald M. Levine on September 25, 2018 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
A split Panel in an early decision under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) held that parties deserve more than “[i]t depends [on] what panelist you draw.” Time Inc. v. Chip Cooper, D2000-1342 (WIPO February 13, 2001). That’s one side of the paradigm; the other side makes demands on the parties to prove […]
What Do UDRP Panels Look for in Assessing Parties’ Rights to Disputed Domain Names?
By Gerald M. Levine on September 4, 2018 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
Panels appointed to adjudicate domain name disputes under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) have written in the region of 50,000 decisions involving over 75,000 domain names (minuscule of course when measured against the number of registered domain names). What may surprise some parties, their representatives, and counsel is that these publicly accessible […]
Limitations, Delays, and Laches as Defenses to Cybersquatting Claims
By Gerald M. Levine on August 19, 2018 in Abusive registration, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, Cybersquatting, cybersquatting law, UDRP Commentaries, udrp law, udrp proceedings, Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy
In passing the baton for combating cybersquatting to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) recommended that “claims under the administrative procedure [should not] be subject to a time limitation” (Final Report, Paragraph 199). ICANN agreed and the UDRP contains no limitation period for making a claim. […]