Inside your domain: fighting domain name abuse
Domain names are the addresses we type into our internet browsers to be taken to a website, like ‘stewartmckelvey.com’. Even easy-to-remember domain names can be confused with similar ones, making them a vector of attack for bad actors. A comprehensive study published this year by the European Union has confirmed that domain name abuse is a persistent and growing issue globally. Over a three-month period, the authors recorded a staggering 2.7 million incidents and 1.68 million abused domain names.
Raising awareness of these threats and what to do about them is one step towards a safer cyber future, and this post reviews an accessible and efficient mechanism for resolving domain name disputes.
Addressing confusion: Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy
To address domain name abuse, the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”, an agency of the United Nations) began administering the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy Administrative Procedure (“Procedure”) in 1999. Through the Procedure, anyone can make a complaint, requesting to have a domain name that is confusingly similar to a complainant’s trademark either cancelled or more often, transferred to the complainant’s control. A large body of cases has been reported under the Procedure.
An early but instructive example is Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v Richard MacLeod, in which Mr. MacLeod of Toronto had registered ‘wal-martsucks.com’ and wanted half a million dollars from Wal-Mart for control of the domain name. Mr. MacLeod didn’t host any content at the disputed domain, but there are many other examples of confusingly similar domain names leading customers to illegal content, such as websites selling counterfeit goods or pushing violent images and speech.
A successful complaint requires clear and concise evidence of three elements:
- The domain name is confusingly similar to a complainant’s trademark;
- The respondent has no legitimate rights in the domain name; and
- The domain name had been registered in bad faith.
In the Wal-Mart example, elements (2) and (3) were met as Mr. MacLeod was effectively holding the domain name hostage, and element (1) was met as the domain name was found to be confusingly similar to Wal-Mart trademarks. In meeting all three elements, Wal-Mart successfully had the domain name ‘wal-martsucks.com’ transferred to its control.
While the Procedure deals with the most popular domains (.com, .org, .net), there is an analogous procedure available specifically for domain names with ‘.ca’.
A successful complaint can be cost- and time-effective
With respect to element (1), a complainant may rely on registered trademark rights or show use of an unregistered mark in association with goods and services to establish common law rights. Businesses that sell online usually have electronic copies of marketing materials and invoices showing sufficient information to establish common law rights in the mark for the purposes of the Procedure. This is especially important for smaller businesses that may not have resources to register their trademark rights and do not have a large budget to put towards evidence collection.
The complaint is submitted entirely electronically to WIPO and a decision is usually rendered by a panelist, an individual chosen by WIPO who possesses relevant skills and experience, within a few months. It generally costs a couple of thousand dollars in fees to submit the complaint, which is often done with the assistance of a trademark lawyer. Especially compared to court proceedings, the Procedure stands as a cost-effective and practical way to fight domain name abuse.
This client update is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Intellectual Property group.
Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.
By: John Samms, Sadira Jan, Paul Kiley, Dave Randell, Alanna Waberski, and Jayna Green As we explained in our July 6, 2022 “Winds of Change” article, the announcement made by Minister Andrew Parsons on April…Read More
Included in Beyond the Border – July 2022 By Brittany Trafford; Fredericton Brief Overview In an attempt to address the Canadian labour market shortages, the Economic Mobility Pathways Pilot (“EMPP”), was introduced in 2018.…Read More
By Alanna Waberski, Graham Haynes and Maria Cummings On June 10, 2022, the Government of New Brunswick proclaimed into force Bill 95, which amends the Business Corporations Act (New Brunswick) (the “NBBCA”) to require corporations…Read More
Included in Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 10 Hannah Brison and Dante Manna Increased financial volatility caused by recent global events has caused public sector defined benefit (“DB”) pension plans to reflect…Read More
Included in Beyond the Border – July 2022 By Sara Espinal Henao; Halifax It is a well-known fact that Atlantic Canada needs workers. In the aftermath of COVID-19, regional employers in the trucking, health, construction,…Read More
By: John Samms, Matthew Craig, Dave Randell, and Jayna Green On July 26, 2022 the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador (the “Province”) released “Guidelines: Nominating Crown Lands for Wind Energy Projects” (the “Guidelines”). Described as…Read More
Included in Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 10 By Kate Profit Tenure is a well known and often discussed topic amongst academics. Viewed by unions as a cornerstone of modern universities,…Read More
Nancy Rubin & Tiegan Scott On July 21, 2022, the Federal government announced a new investment of up to $255 million for clean energy initiatives in Nova Scotia. The funds will be allocated in two…Read More