'Largely Unintelligible' UDRP Complaints

'Largely Unintelligible' UDRP Complaints

Drafting a complaint under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) may seem like a simple process – but it's not. In this video, Doug Isenberg discusses two cases lost by trademark owners where the panels referred to "poorly prepared submissions" that were "so sparse as to be largely unintelligible" and where a complainant "failed to offer arguments or evidence to support any of its contentions."

Hyphens in Domain Disputes: <l-e-g-o.com> and more

Hyphens in Domain Disputes: &lt;l-e-g-o.com&gt; and more

When it comes to resolving disputes under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), hyphens usually don't matter. For example, UDRP panels have found the domain names l-e-g-o.com, facebook-verifications.com, and bmw---deutschland.info were all confusingly similar to the obvious trademarks. Trademark owners should be aware of how cybersquatters use hyphens in online scams.

UDRP Case Study: When to Avoid Large Complaints

UDRP Case Study: When to Avoid Large Complaints

Consolidating multiple domain names into a single complaint under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) can be an incredibly efficient way for a trademark owner to tackle cybersquatters -- but this video discusses a case that makes clear why this practice is not always the right choice and needs to be taken seriously. Here, Doug Isenberg discusses why a UDRP panel at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) rejected a trademark owner's attempt to include 14 domain names in one complaint, forcing the trademark owner to expend additional time and money filing multiple complaints.