Rate of cybersquatting continues decline.
The rate of cybersquatting, as measured by arbitration filings under Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy, has hit an all time low.
A Domain Name Wire analysis of UDRP filings dating back to 2000, the first year UDRP was widely used, showed marked declines. UDRP filings were compared to the total number of .com domain names in existence each year to calculate an effective rate of cybersquatting.
Although .com domain names make up only a subset of the domain universe, the majority of UDRP filings are related to .com domains.
The data shows that the rate of UDRP filings to the .com registration base has rapidly decreased from one per 7,000 domains in 2000 to about 1 in 20,000 domains in 2008. Preliminary to-date 2009 data shows the rate may slip further this year. Growth rate in UDRP cases has been outstripped by the growth rate in domain registrations every year that registrations have grown.
To calculate the total number of UDRPs filed, Domain Name Wire collected actual statistics available from WIPO, and added National Arbitration Forum and eResolution statistics from UDRPsearch. Data from Czech Arbitration Court, a new service, was not considered. UDRP data was compared to end-of-year .com registration data collected by Zooknic and DomainTools.
The graph below shows the rate of UDRP cases to the total .com registration base, using an inverted scale.
The decrease in rate of cybersquatting may be attributed to a number of factors, including greater knowledge and education about cybersquatting amongst the domain registrant community.
Andrew:
I was sitting at a bar at Taboo in Palm Beach last night and the guy next me was downing shot after shot of Scotch. When I asked what was wrong he told me he was an IP attorney and basically reiterated the UDRP Cybersquatting Rate decline you posted above. He said that business was terrible and that it was going to be a sad holiday season for him and his family. I said, “Hey buddy, cheer up. It’s not that bad. They’ll be releasing the new gTLDs soon and you’ll have more work than you’ll know what to do with.”
Immediately his eyes brightened and he grabbed a surprised bartender, pulling his face close to his, “The new gTLDs? Yes! The new gTLDS! Oh my God, I’d totally forgotten about them! Yes! Yes! Yes!”
The last I saw of him he was clicking his heels and high-fiving strangers as he ran down Worth Avenue.
Wouldn’t it be nice if the mass media were to report this. Cybersquatting is/was an insult to the better part of the domain name industry. Efforts to educate others must be paying off, at least a little.
Great News… 🙂
I like the information.
We all know what the registration graph looks like.
Wouldn’t it also be informative if you dispayed a graph of the quantity of UDRP per year?
@ Domain Investor –
Here are appx # filed each year
2000 2900
2001 2500
2002 2400
2003 2000
2004 2100
2005 2650
2006 3330
2007 3700
2008 4000
@ Domain Investor – just reread your comment. The graph takes into consideration both registrations and UDRP filings.
I think cybersquatting may be lower than in the past, but this graph can’t possibly show this decline.
The problem is, registrations are growing, number of typos that are going to bring in revenue is the same. Revenues are on a decline.
The thing is there is not many more good typos left for people to register. All new registrations are mainly of generics.
You’d have to crawl the web year by year and figure out the number of domains that are typos and that are display ads, that’s the only way to do it.
Matt – by definition, that would mean a lower rate of cybersquatting. If a lower % of domains being registered are typos, then the rate has to go lower.
Only a fool can write an article like that and draw conclusions drawn above.
“Only a fool can write an article like that and draw conclusions drawn above.”
Nothing like a well-reasoned rebuttal…
Oh okay, agreed the rate is lower year by year because typos have hit the peak.
I misunderstood the article as “cybersquatting is on a decline”. In which case, probably still is a bit, but definitely not possible to determine based on UDRP filings.
Andrew,
The data you provided is what has been reported to UDRP. To come to the conclusion that cybersquatting is down is a long shot at validating when you look at all the facts IMO.
Fact 1: 99% of trademark domains and typos are registered already. You can’t register what is not available.
Fact 2: The majority of trademark giants already own their domains or previously went through the UDRP or WIPO to gain control of their domains.
Fact 3: Only a small percentage of Trademark holders own their TM domains and TM typos. Maybe 2-3%?
Fact 4: 99% of domain TM typos not owned by TM Holders are owned by cybersquatters cashing in on typein traffic. Their goal is not to sell the domains, but benefit from traffic to earn PPC revenue.
Fact 5: A large percentage of Trademark holders only own their domain. The majority of TM holders (Medium to Small Businesses)could care less about typo domains, or do not understand the value on how typo domains can reenforce and protect their brands.
Fact 6: This is a result of lower UDRP filings each year by TM holders. Once these TM Owners are educated on how these typos take away value from their brands, UDRP and WIPO cases will sky rocket. Additionally, when the economy rebounds as well.
Fact 7: The amount of cybersquatters is still astronomical when you look at all the TM typos that have not been challenged by the TM Holder.
Fact 8: The cost of filing a WIPO or UDRP against a cybersquatter will always be some sort of deterant from the owners going after TM typos when they already own the domain.
I believe the title should have read UDRP filings down when compared to domain registration growth.
Every once in a while, I do a TM typo by accident and it takes me to a parked page and cybersquatter. Latest example: http://www.bulkregster.com. I ask myself, how could this company who is in the domain industry allow this cybersquatting to take place? If they are letting it slide and are educated on the subject, you can bet large, medium and small business TM Holders are lost in the sauce.
Only my opinion.
Thanks,
Steve
All comments are great reading. D The C’s comment is FUN reading! 😉