WHYFRAME / Shutterstock.com
To get the best results from the UDRP, don’t underestimate the need to follow the process properly, says Steve Levy of FairWinds Partners.
The Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) was created more than 16 years ago as a low-cost, speedy, and more efficient alternative to full-blown court litigation to address rather clear-cut cases of cybersquatting.
In exchange for these benefits, the UDRP does away with what are, perhaps, the most time-consuming and expensive aspects of litigation, such as discovery, witness testimony, cross-examination, motion practice, and live hearings. As the UDRP is a stripped-down, bare-bones, and highly focused dispute process, cases are decided only on the basis of the written documents submitted by each side. This means that pleadings and evidence must be prepared very carefully and in a focused manner to make the most convincing case right at the start.
As a panellist for two UDRP providers and an avid reader of decisions issued by other panels, I see quite a range of complaint styles. Some are very well prepared, succinct, and efficient in supporting their arguments with just the right evidence.
The rest of this article is locked for subscribers only. Please login to continue reading.
If you don't have a login, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content. Please use this link and follow the steps.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription to us that we can add you to for FREE, please email Atif Choudhury at achoudhury@worldipreview.com
Steve Levy, FairWinds Partners, UDRP, Chris Pearson v Domain Admin / Automattic, trademark, domain name,
