Registration service offers free insurance against expensive but unfounded UDRP filings.
Francois Carrillo, the guy behind Domaining.com, has launched a new domain registrar (an eNom reseller) with an innovative twist: “UDRP insurance”.
Basically, if you’re hit with a UDRP on one of your domains registered at DONA.com then you’ll get assistance with finding a domain attorney. Selected domain attorneys offer discounted rates to DONA customers. And if you successfully defend your UDRP, DONA will reimburse you for your legal expenses.
It sounds like an interesting idea that might offer some peace of mind if you frequently get hit with bogus UDRPs.
Additionally, DONA donates 30% of its profits to the Internet Commerce Association, an advocacy group for domainers.
.Com domain registrations at DONA are $11.15.
John UK says
To be honest this doesnt take one much further forward. What should be done is a group of domainers should get together, pool their resources and fight a few cases vigorously to build up some “case law” .
Unless he’s dealt with the State Insurance Commissioners (and I doubt that very much), he may want to re-think that “insurance” descriptor. Just a thought.
John Berryhill says
Whether a referral and reimbursement service run by someone in France qualifies as “insurance” for US state regulatory purposes is, I guess, an interesting question. I don’t know that there is any magic in using the word per se. It doesn’t really strike me as “insurance” as the term is normally used.
This is an idea that’s been kicked around by a few folks for a number of years, and usually runs aground on the problem of self-selected risk.
But given that the reimbursement offered is only in the event of a win, I suppose it avoids the self-selection problem, but also would tend toward whatever lawyers they have signed on to this thing (which also raises issues) being motivated to counsel against defending edge cases.
For the easiest-to-defend cases, a substantial part of the total cost is the three-member panel fee, which is strongly advisable even in “easy” cases, since you can’t really count on a potluck panelist having much experience or knowledge of relevant principles. It’s not clear whether the promised reimbursement is intended to cover that portion of the cost, which is $1350 at NAF and $2000 at WIPO.
Thanks for the comments.
The reimbursement is intended to cover the attorney used to defend the case and the panelists. Now we will cap this amount to $5,000 to avoid abuse due to the fact DONA.com members will have no obligation to use any of the suggested attorneys.
The domain hit by an UDRP must be registered at DONA.com for 3 months minimum to avoid possible abuses.
Ms Domainer says
Given that panelists tend to ignore precedence in UDRP cases, the idea that one can set “case law” seems somewhat moot.
Better yet, if one is hit with a UDRP, maybe it would be best to go directly to court–perhaps that’s what domainers and other owners of domain property ought to do instead of diddling around with the increasingly chancy UDRP route.
Andrew Allemann says
@ Ms Domainer – I’d argue that the push for laches in UDRP has been somewhat successful. Laches hasn’t been accepted, but more and more panelists consider it and question why it has taken so long for a complaint to be brought.
John UK says
@MsDomainer Yes agree entirely.I regret that I lost a domain to one of richest men in world and did not take to Court. I think 4 years is now out of time to go to Court in USA ,is it ??
John Berryhill says
“DONA.com members will have no obligation to use any of the suggested attorneys.”
…and just what are the qualifications of the “suggested attorneys”?