Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 18 NOVEMBER 2009

Fast-Track Option For Domain Name Disputes

Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Explore more from Barnes & Thornburg LLP

In response to the exponential growth of domain name registrations, and the resulting increase in actions brought under the ICANN's Uniform Domain-Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has proposed a low-cost "fast track" option for a streamlined UDRP process.

United StatesIntellectual Property
Barnes & Thornburg'S Intellectual Property Group
Barnes & Thornburg'S Intellectual Property Group
Author LinkedIn connections

In response to the exponential growth of domain name registrations, and the resulting increase in actions brought under the ICANN's Uniform Domain-Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has proposed a low-cost "fast track" option for a streamlined UDRP process. The fast track option would be especially appropriate for the more obvious cybersquatting cases, including registrations that involve a misspelled famous mark or "pay per click" sites.

How Does The "Fast Track" Option Work?

Currently, 75 percent of the domain name disputes filed with WIPO result in a default judgment because the registrant does not respond to the complaint. The fast track option would reduce both the time and cost to resolve these "default" cases. Under standard procedures, a decision in a single domain name "default" case would take two weeks and cost $1,500. In contrast, a decision under the fast track option would be rendered in 2-3

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

UMG v. DistroKid: When AI Becomes A Consumer Protection Issue

Universal Music Group's lawsuit against DistroKid raises a critical question about AI disclosure in consumer markets: when does the use of artificial intelligence become material information that must be disclosed to consumers? The case centers on allegations that DistroKid distributed mass-generated AI music while creating the impression it was created by legitimate human artists, potentially violating existing consumer protection laws even without specific AI disclosure requirements.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Article

The Trademark Scam Field Guide: Look-Alike Filing Sites, Fake USPTO Notices, And How To Get Out If You’ve Been Caught

A business decides to file a trademark. Someone on the team searches for a familiar online legal-services brand, clicks the first result, and lands on a site with a similar-sounding name, a polished design, five-star reviews, and a low flat fee. The application gets filed. Months later the business learns the “service” was not who they thought it was, the filing was signed by someone with no authority to sign it, and the USPTO has suspended the application along with hundreds or thousands of others from the same shop.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Harness IP
Harness IP
Article

PTAB/USPTO Update - October 2026

The USPTO has released new templates and guidance for AIA trial proceedings, announced key appointments including a Chief AI Officer, and published updated procedures for patent applications and subject matter eligibility declarations. Director Squires delivered multiple addresses emphasizing the constitutional importance of intellectual property rights while the agency expanded its community engagement efforts and international collaboration through WIPO's Global IP Assignment Platform pilot program.
United StatesIntellectual Property
WilmerHale
WilmerHale
Article

Is This Real? Navigating AI Impersonation Under New And Existing Laws

Is this AI-generated, or is it real? As generative AI tools have become increasingly capable of creating realistic images, videos, and audio, they have also made it easier to impersonate real people without their consent. In response, states are increasingly adopting laws that impose civil and criminal liability for certain AI-generated content that replicates an individual’s identity, likeness, voice, or other personal attributes.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Wiley Rein
Wiley Rein
Article

IEEPA Tariff Refunds: Critical Developments, Phase III Delays, And Action Steps For Importers

U.S. Customs and Border Protection has begun processing IEEPA tariff refunds through its CAPE system, but Phase III covering finally liquidated entries faces delays and requires court orders. With the Department of Justice appealing the universal refund order and class certification pending, importers with finally liquidated entries may need to file individual lawsuits at the Court of International Trade to preserve their claims before statutory deadlines expire.
United StatesInternational Law
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Article

OFAC Broadens Cuba Sanctions And Restricts Payments And Travel

The U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control has implemented sweeping changes to Cuba sanctions, introducing a new regulatory framework that extends restrictions beyond U.S. persons to foreign entities and financial institutions. These measures eliminate key banking authorizations, expand transaction prohibitions to include intermediary payments, and significantly narrow travel permissions, creating new compliance challenges for businesses operating in or through Cuba-related channels.
United StatesGovernment, Public Sector
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Article

California Passes AB-1883 Targeting AI Workplace Surveillance Of Employees’ Emotional State And Neural Data

On Aug. 30, AB-1883 received final legislative approval and now heads to California Governor Gavin Newsom for signature or veto. If enacted, AB-1883 would prohibit employers from using workplace surveillance tools that rely on artificial intelligence (AI) to recognize, infer, or predict an employee’s emotional state, or to collect “neural data.”
United StatesEmployment and HR
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Article

Russia Sanctions And Tariffs: What Businesses Need To Know About The Graham Act

President Trump has signed the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, introducing sweeping new tariffs of up to 100% on countries purchasing Russian energy and up to 500% on Russian-origin goods. The legislation also codifies existing executive order sanctions into statute, requiring congressional action to lift restrictions and creating mandatory secondary sanctions on foreign financial institutions transacting with designated Russian banks. Companies face immediate compliance challenge
RussiaInternational Law
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Article

Time To Update The Handbook And The Training Deck: Three New California Laws Affecting Employment Policies And Training

California Governor Newsom has signed three bills that will require California employers to revisit their written policies and their training programs. On the policy side, SB 1149 widens who counts as a “family member” for bereavement leave. On the training side, AB 1803 adds an anti-hate speech component to mandatory harassment prevention training starting Jan. 1, 2028.
United StatesEmployment and HR
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP