Membership is FREE – with unlimited access to all features, tools, and discussions. Premium accounts get benefits like banner ads and newsletter exposure. ✅ Signature links are now free for all. 🚫 No AI-generated (LLM) posts allowed. Share your own thoughts and experience — accounts may be terminated for violations.
I will probably be filing my first UDRP complaint
- Thread starter KatieBeez
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2002
- Messages
- 590
- Reaction score
- 1
I have some tips on how to *respond* to one (from a "not a lawyer, and don't play one on TV either" perspective), but nothing on how to file one... still, it may be of interest:
http://domains.dan.info/conflicts/whattodo.html
And my general page on the UDRP and other ICANN challenge policies:
http://domains.dan.info/conflicts/icann.html
http://domains.dan.info/conflicts/whattodo.html
And my general page on the UDRP and other ICANN challenge policies:
http://domains.dan.info/conflicts/icann.html
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
- Messages
- 2,588
- Reaction score
- 23
Sure.
1. Prove that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade or service mark in which you own rights.
2. Prove that the registrant has no legitimate rights or interests in the domain name.
3. Prove that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith.
If you do those three things, you should have no problem.
1. Prove that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade or service mark in which you own rights.
2. Prove that the registrant has no legitimate rights or interests in the domain name.
3. Prove that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith.
If you do those three things, you should have no problem.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2003
- Messages
- 15
- Reaction score
- 0
WIPO and the National Arbitration Forum? WIPO is more expensive and I believe I have seen you say before that it is best to try and get three panelists if possible? Unfortunately, my company will probably want to pay the lower fee for one panelist.
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
- Messages
- 2,588
- Reaction score
- 23
Katie,
I have never suggested that complainants should select a three-member panel.
I have never suggested that complainants should select a three-member panel.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2002
- Messages
- 590
- Reaction score
- 1
It's respondents that are better off with a three member panel, not complainants (although, on occasion, complainants *do* request a three member panel anyway). The reason is that there tends to be a pro-complainant bias in the panelists in general, so a randomly-selected panelist is more likely than not to be in favor of the complainant; a three-member panel, however, gives the respondent a chance to pick one member, allowing a pro-respondent panelist to be picked.
- Status
Similar threads
