It is elementary that the evidence a party needs to successfully prosecute or defend a UDRP case comes from two sources: that which it controls (private information) and that which it must obtain from others (unobtainable private – anything that... Read More

The mix of cases always includes the occasional complaint that is unsuited to arbitration under the Policy. While there is some elasticity in the construction of “abusive registration,” business disputes in which the domain name is inseparable... Read More

2008 has been fruitful for personal name decisions. As a general rule a person aggrieved by a registrant misappropriating his personal name for use on the Internet cannot look for a quick remedy under the UDRP unless he can bring himself within the rule’s... Read More

By David Taylor and Jane Seager of Hogan Lovells dedicated domain name practice In a recent case brought under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), Dolce & Gabbana s.r.l., the well known Italian fashion company, failed... Read More

The Policy lists four non‑exclusive examples of bad faith. Each identifies a particular and distinguishable parasitic or predatory act. While it may be true that a respondent’s conduct can be actionable under more than one theory, they should not... Read More

In the comment “Punting or Admirable Restraint” I reported on a case that the Panel held was not ripe for determination under the Policy. The issue there concerned lack of subject matter jurisdiction and brought into play panelists’... Read More

UDRP complaints are resolved solely on papers without benefit of discovery and with no right of confrontation. For this reason the pleadings and evidence must be developed with as much care and be as complete as a motion for summary judgment in a civil... Read More

In a letter dated April 16, 2008, WIPO calls ICANN’s attention to "certain registrar-related practices ... having a potentially adverse effect on the function of the ICANN-mandated Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy." While... Read More

Domain names composed of generic terms or common words and expressions do not violate the Policy when they “have been registered because of their attraction as dictionary words, and not because of their value as trade marks, ” Land Mark Group... Read More

Policy, ¶4(a) provides that the respondent is “required to submit to a mandatory administrative proceeding in the event that a third party (a ‘complainant’) alleges” that its trademark is the target of an abusive registration... Read More

Once a case is submitted to a Panel, it is either decided or terminated. If terminated it is either because one of the parties has commenced a civil action or by consent. Consent to transfer takes two forms: either 1) the respondent unilaterally agrees... Read More

The UDRP requires that the complainant prove both registration and use in bad faith [¶4(a)(iii)]. In contrast, country code ADRs take a different approach: one or the other, but not both. A couple of recent close decisions respectively under the... Read More

Against a complainant who abuses the UDRP procedure – a recent example being Collective Media, Inc. v. CKV / COLLECTIVEMEDIA.COM , D2008-0641 (WIPO July 31, 2008), who argued entitlement to the domain the registered years before because it had applied... Read More

Although trademark holders are not limited territorially in maintaining a proceeding under the UDRP – a “complainant’s showing of secondary meaning within a limited geographical area will be sufficient to invoke all of the rights and... Read More

Against cases initiated under the Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy the consensus is that laches is not a defense to a claim of violation. Paradoxically, however, lapse of time may be fatal. In contrast, laches can be a viable defense to a claim for... Read More