Two cases show why you need competent counsel to file a UDRP.
A good number of domain names are lost via UDRP when the domain name owner fails to put up an adequate defense. The domain name owner fails to hire a qualified domain name attorney who understands the ins and outs of UDRP.
I’m also baffled when complainants drop the ball in a UDRP, either by not filing a strong case or by filing one that has no chance of winning.
Two National Arbitration Forum decisions came across today that are good examples.
First, Canadian internet company/cable company Shaw Communications lost a UDRP it filed against F*ckShaw.com. The domain owner didn’t respond, but Shaw’s Director of Intellectual Property failed to even make a prima facie case that the domain owner lacked rights or legitimate interests in the domain name.
The second case was for makerplace.com. In this case, complainant MakerPlace, Inc. literally admitted, “We believe Mr. Salmon originally registered the domain incorrectly but in good faith.”
Makerplace might have a claim against the domain owner, but not one that’s right for UDRP.
Eric Lyon says
I tend to agree. I think if anyone is seriously looking to protect their asset or brand name, they need an attorney that specializes in such cases to fight in their corner. Legal lingo can be hard to translate for most people. Having someone fluent in the lingo, hands on experience, and access to all the research outlets at their disposal is a benefit to anyone’s arsenal of brand/asset protection strategy.
John Berryhill says
I occasionally see self-filed UDRP complaints in which the complainant apparently believed it was a process of (a) fill out the form with a couple of sentences, (b) pay the fee, and (c) get a domain name. Those often make for difficult responses, because you first have to figure out what would have been a decent argument, and then argue against that. It’s almost twice the work, since you never know when you will get a panelist that decides on their own to “make the better argument” on the facts presented by the complainant, and you won’t know until you get the decision.
The other difficulty with those is that you have to go easy on the complainant, since wiping the floor with someone who simply didn’t know what they were doing is unseemly.