The Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS) is often described as a domain name dispute policy that applies to the new gTLDs. While that's true, the URS is actually broader than that.
After 21 Years, Actor David Duchovny Wins His Domain Name
While plenty of UDRP decisions have made clear that a trademark owner's delay in bringing an action against a cybersquatter (often referred to as "laches") is typically not a defense, actor David Duchovny's decision to file a UDRP complaint nearly 21 years after the domain name <davidduchovny.com> was registered may set a record for the longest wait in a domain name dispute.
The UDRP Applies to These Top-Level Domains
How to Dispute a Third-Level 'Country-Code' .com Domain Name (Such as nike.eu.com)
Shortly after I recently wrote about WIPO's new role as a domain name dispute provider for the .eu ccTLD, the Forum published its first decision on another type of "eu" domain name: eu.com.
Trademark Owner Loses Two Domain Name Disputes – On Same Domain Name
I've said many times that winning a domain name dispute under the URS is much more challenging than under the UDRP. But, that doesn't mean trademark owners should take the UDRP for granted. One complainant learned that lesson an especially hard way – first by losing a URS determination and then by losing a UDRP decision on the same domain name.
WIPO Now Accepting .eu Domain Name Disputes
WIPO, the leading provider of domain name disputes under the UDRP, has been appointed as a service provider for .eu disputes, as of June 1, 2017. Previously, the only provider of dispute services for the .eu top-level domain was the Czech Arbitration Court (CAC) -- also a UDRP provider -- which has handled about 1,200 .eu disputes since 2006.
These Countries Have Adopted the UDRP
The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) is certainly the most frequently used tool to combat cybersquatting -- but, it is not always an option. Many countries have adopted their own domain name dispute policies -- or none at all -- in lieu of the UDRP.
WIPO’s UDRP ‘Overview’ Gets Bigger (and Better)
Just as the number of domain names and domain name disputes have expanded significantly in recent years, so, too, has WIPO's "Overview," which has been updated to address the growing complexity of cases under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). WIPO has just published the third edition of its "WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions" -- commonly referred to as "WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0."
GigaLaw.com is Now Giga.Law: Behind the Launch of a New Domain Name
The GigaLaw website – available at the domain name gigalaw.com for more than 17 years – now has a new home, and it’s at a new generic top-level domain (gTLD): giga.law. Dot-law is one of more than 1,200 new gTLDs that have become active since ICANN revealed the applications almost five years ago for the largest expansion of the domain name system.
A Lesson from the EPA in Domain Name Disputes
While the U.S.A. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been making news as the result of controversial changes brought about under the new Trump administration -- including the planned removal of "several agency websites containing detailed climate data and scientific information" -- the EPA also has generated some (lesser-known) domain name news: The agency won a decision under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) for the domain name <noattacks.org>.
Although UDRP complaints filed by governmental entities are not unprecedented, they are not common. Indeed, governments don't even make an appearance on WIPO's list of the types of trademark owners that file UDRP complaints.
That may be because government agencies are not typically thought of as trademark owners. But sometimes, they are.
In the EPA case, the trademark at issue, NO ATTACKS (which the EPA used in connection with anti-asthma campaigns), apparently was not registered. But as the UDRP panel noted, "There is no requirement under the UDRP that a complainant must show registration of a trademark to demonstrate its rights therein. Rights may be shown by persuasive evidence of common law trademark rights in a mark."
Fortunately for the EPA, the UDRP panel agreed that it had established common law trademark rights in NO ATTACKS -- as the result of its "public use of such mark over a period of 15 years" and an investment of "$450 million in advertising" related to the mark.
Interestingly, the EPA previously had registered the <noattacks.org> domain name but, like many other domain name registrants that find themselves filing UDRP complaints, the EPA allowed it to lapse "[t]hrough inadvertence." The new registrant used the domain name in connection with a pay-per-click (PPC) website and also offered it for sale for $25,000, according to the UDRP decision. The panel found this sufficient to establish the required bad-faith element.
In many ways, the EPA case is like many other domain name disputes: A domain name owner creates a domain name, invests significant sums of money promoting it, fails to protect it by pursuing a relevant trademark registration, and then lets its expire. The UDRP decision doesn't explain why any of this happened, but it should be a warning to other trademark owners to take domain name management seriously.
(Interestingly, before the UDRP decision for <noattacks.org> was implemented and the domain name transferred back to the EPA, the "No Attacks" website was posted at a different address, which contained this notice: "Due to technical difficulties with the URL www.noattacks.org, this website is temporarily hosted at http://noattacks.scgcorp.com/". I'm not so sure "technical difficulties" is the most accurate label.)
Perhaps the EPA could have benefited from one of my previous blog posts, such as this one: "New Year's Resolution: Renew Your Domain Name! (And Other Best Practices for Domain Name Management)."
