The Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) offers a streamlined way to resolve domain name disputes. It tackles cybersquatting and bad faith registrations, providing a quicker alternative to court for trademark owners facing online infringement.

UDRP proceedings involve specific steps, from filing a complaint to panel decision. Key elements include proving the domain's similarity to a trademark, the respondent's lack of rights, and bad faith registration and use. UDRP differs from ACPA litigation in scope and remedies.

Understanding UDRP Proceedings in Trademark Law

UDRP for domain name disputes

• UDRP administrative procedure resolves domain name disputes efficiently established by ICANN as alternative to court litigation
• Addresses cybersquatting and bad faith registrations for generic top-level domains (gTLDs) and some country-code top-level domains (ccTLDs)
• Mandatory for domain name registrants with binding decisions on registrars while preserving court remedy options
• Applies globally to combat online trademark infringement (cybersquatting.com, brand-confusion.net)

Steps in UDRP proceedings

1. Complainant files with approved dispute resolution provider including required elements and evidence
2. Provider reviews complaint for UDRP rule compliance and notifies of deficiencies
3. Provider notifies respondent and locks domain to prevent transfer
4. Respondent has 20 days to respond; no automatic default judgment for non-response
5. Provider appoints 1 or 3-member panel; parties may have input on 3-member selection
6. Panel renders decision within 14 days and publishes
7. Registrar implements decision after 10 business days unless court proceedings initiated

Elements of UDRP complaints

• Domain identical or confusingly similar to complainant's trademark (registered or unregistered)
  • Assessed on appearance, sound, and meaning (coca-cola.com vs koka-kola.net)
• Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in domain
  • Burden shifts to respondent to show legitimate use (news-site.com for actual news website)
• Domain registered and used in bad faith
  • Both registration and use must be proven
  • Factors: intent to sell for profit, preventing trademark use, disrupting competitor, attracting users for gain

UDRP vs ACPA litigation

• Both address cybersquatting and require bad faith proof
• UDRP global administrative proceeding vs ACPA U.S. federal law in courts
• UDRP limited to domain transfer/cancellation; ACPA allows monetary damages and attorney fees
• UDRP generally faster and less expensive than ACPA court procedures
• UDRP complainant proves all elements; ACPA has additional statutory factors
• UDRP allows court action instead of formal appeal; ACPA has standard court appeals
• UDRP locks domain during proceeding; ACPA may need separate action to freeze domain