If you’re going to file a UDRP against an inexpensive domain, you better make sure you have a good case.
The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) provides an affordable and relatively quick way to resolve cybersquatting disputes. But it still costs money: about $1,500 to file a complaint in addition to legal fees.
So it surprises me when someone files a UDRP against a domain name that’s offered for sale at a relatively low price.
There are circumstances where it makes sense to file a UDRP even if it will cost more than paying the domain owner. Brands certainly don’t want to reward cybersquatting. Buying a domain that’s clearly cybersquatting on your brand might lead to more cybersquatting.
But if you file a UDRP against an inexpensive domain, you better make darn sure you have a good case.
A Brazilian music label apparently didn’t. Azul Music Multimídia filed a UDRP against AzulMusic.com and lost. According to the decision, the domain had a buy now price of just $2,599. So now, the company is out the filing fee and legal fees and still doesn’t own the domain.
There’s one other interesting thing about this dispute. The domain was listed for sale on PerfectDomain, a brandable domain marketplace that the team behind .xyz recently acquired. This domain appears to be owned by the same people. But the World Intellectual Property Organization panelist looked at other domains on the platform to determine the intentions of the domain owner. This is a bit scary; from what I can tell, some of the domains the panelist cited are owned by different entities. I can understand looking at the domain owner’s portfolio, but not domains owned by others that happen to be marketed on the same platform.