--- id: "udrp" kind: "glossary-term" title: "UDRP" language: "en" category: "Rights protection and disputes" updated: "2026-10-10T09:13:24Z" canonical: "https://tldlog.com/glossary/udrp/" translations: es: "https://tldlog.com/es/glosario/udrp/" de: "https://tldlog.com/de/glossar/udrp/" fr: "https://tldlog.com/fr/glossaire/udrp/" it: "https://tldlog.com/it/glossario/udrp/" pt-BR: "https://tldlog.com/pt/glossario/udrp/" ru: "https://tldlog.com/ru/glossariy/udrp/" zh-Hans: "https://tldlog.com/zh/cihui/udrp/" --- # UDRP Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy An ICANN policy that lets a trademark owner challenge a domain name registered and used in bad faith without going to court. A panel from an approved provider, such as WIPO, decides whether the name is transferred, canceled or kept. It covers all gTLDs and ccTLDs that adopt it. The UDRP lets a trademark owner try to recover a domain name that someone registered to take unfair advantage of the mark, without going to court. The owner sends a written complaint to an approved dispute resolution provider, and one or three independent experts decide. The name is then transferred, canceled or left with its holder. No money is awarded. ## What the UDRP is ICANN adopted the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy on 26 August 1999, based on a WIPO design. Every ICANN-accredited registrar applies it, and it is part of the registration agreement, so every gTLD registrant accepts it. Some ccTLDs, such as .co, .me and .tv (as of October 2026), use it as written; others use a variant. It covers only abusive registrations of names that match a trademark. Five roles matter: - The **complainant**, usually a trademark owner, files against the **respondent**, the domain holder. - The **provider**, chosen by the complainant, handles the paperwork and appoints the panel, but does not decide. As of October 2026, ICANN approves five: ADNDRC, CIIDRC, the Czech Arbitration Court, Forum and WIPO. - The **panel**, one or three impartial experts, decides on the written file. - The **registrar** locks the name and carries out the decision, but takes no part in the case. ## The three things a complainant must prove The complainant must prove all three elements on the balance of probabilities, that is, more likely than not. If one fails, the complaint fails. 1. **The name is identical or confusingly similar to a mark in which the complainant has rights.** Registered and unregistered marks count. Panels treat this as a low entry test and ignore the TLD. 2. **The holder has no rights or legitimate interests in the name.** Defences include genuine business use, or demonstrable preparations for it, before notice of the dispute; being commonly known by the name; and legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Once the complainant shows a credible initial case, the holder must bring evidence. 3. **The name was registered and is being used in bad faith.** Both are needed. The Policy's examples, not a closed list: registering to sell the name to the mark owner above out-of-pocket costs, blocking the owner as a pattern, disrupting a competitor, or attracting users for profit through confusion. In the Telstra case (WIPO D2000-0003, 18 February 2000), the panel held that inaction can be bad faith use. Under this passive holding doctrine, panels weigh factors such as the mark's reputation and false contact details. ## How a case works, step by step 1. The complainant files with a provider, chooses one or three panelists and accepts a Mutual Jurisdiction for any later court challenge. The fee must arrive within 10 calendar days. 2. Within 2 business days of the provider's request, the registrar confirms the registration data and locks the name. 3. The provider sends the complaint to the respondent within 3 calendar days of receiving the fee. That date starts the case. 4. The respondent has 20 days to answer, plus 4 calendar days on request. 5. If one panelist was chosen, the panelist is appointed within 5 calendar days after the response or the deadline; the panel decides within 14 days of its appointment. 6. The provider sends the decision to the parties and the registrar within 3 business days. The registrar waits 10 business days before acting. During the lock, the name cannot move to another holder or registrar, but the website, email and renewals keep working. The parties can settle at any time before the decision. ## Costs and timelines The complainant pays the provider. The respondent pays only if it alone asks for three panelists: then it pays half of that fee. As of October 2026, WIPO charges, in US dollars (USD), 1,500 for 1 to 5 names with one panelist and 4,000 with three panelists. Lawyers' fees come on top. WIPO says a case without procedural issues normally ends within 2 months of the complaint. The 10-business-day wait comes after that. ## Possible outcomes and going to court The panel orders the transfer of the name to the complainant or its cancellation, or it denies the complaint and the holder keeps the name. Decisions are published in full. A panel can also declare a complaint abusive, for example as Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, but with no money penalty. There is no appeal inside the UDRP, but either party can go to court before, during or after a case. If the losing holder sues the complainant in the Mutual Jurisdiction within the 10 business days and sends official proof, the registrar waits for a settlement, the end of the lawsuit or a court order. ## Defending a case as a domain holder A response usually answers each element with evidence, such as earlier genuine business use, registration before the mark existed, or a dictionary meaning not aimed at the mark. The WIPO Overview 3.1, of 17 February 2026, summarizes how panels usually decide. It is not binding, but findings tend to follow it. It says that holding dictionary words or acronyms for resale can be legitimate when the purpose was not to target a trademark. Not answering is risky, because the panel then decides on the complaint, although a default is not an automatic loss. Holders often consult a lawyer. ## UDRP versus URS and ccTLD procedures The URS is a faster procedure for clear-cut cases in gTLDs under an ICANN registry agreement, including all new gTLDs. The holder has 14 days to respond, and the complainant needs clear and convincing evidence, a higher standard. The only remedy is suspension for the rest of the registration period, never a transfer. As of October 2026, it costs the complainant USD 300 to 500 and typically takes less than three weeks. Many ccTLDs have their own rules. For .es, bad faith in either the registration or the use is enough, and protected rights go beyond trademarks, for example to company names and the names of Spanish public bodies. According to WIPO, .es cases have one panelist and run in Spanish. ## Sources - [Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy](https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2024-02-21-en) - [Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules")](https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/udrp-rules-2024-02-21-en) - [WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Select UDRP Questions ("WIPO Overview 3.1")](https://www.wipo.int/en/web/amc/domain-name-disputes/overview/index) ## related terms - [cybersquatting](https://tldlog.com/glossary/cybersquatting/) - [URS](https://tldlog.com/glossary/urs/) - [WIPO](https://tldlog.com/glossary/wipo/) - [RDNH](https://tldlog.com/glossary/reverse-domain-name-hijacking/)