Skip to Content

Inside your domain: fighting domain name abuse

Brendan Peters

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:

  1. The domain name is confusingly similar to a complainant’s trademark;
  2. The respondent has no legitimate rights in the domain name; and
  3. 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.

Archive

Relief (potentially) in sight – The availability of remission under the Canadian retaliatory tariff regime (Part I)

BY Michelle Chai & Graeme Hiebert

By Michelle Chai & Graeme Hiebert As Canadian importers are feeling the squeeze of the new tariff regime, the Canadian Federal Government has implemented some processes which they hope will provide Canadian businesses…

Read More

Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal sends tort of “Intrusion Upon Seclusion” back into seclusion: Mount Pearl (City) v. Power, 2025 NLCA 16

BY Joe Thorne & Danielle Harris

By Joe Thorne and Danielle Harris After a brief two years of recognition in this province of a common law claim for breach of privacy, it seems its time has…

Read More

Preparing for Canada’s “Modern Slavery Act”: reporting deadline May 31

By Colleen Keyes, K.C., Christine Pound, ICD.D, and Harper Metler The 2024 reports under the Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act (the “Act”) are due…

Read More

New harassment prevention obligations for Nova Scotia employers

By Sean Kelly, Katharine Mack and Tiegan Scott Effective September 1, 2025, amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act passed last year will require employers in Nova Scotia to…

Read More

Non-disclosure agreements: A sword or a shield?

Murray L. Murphy, K.C., CPHR, Katharine Mack and Kate Profit Non-Disclosure Agreements (“NDAs”), legal contracts in which the parties agree to keep information outlined in the agreement strictly confidential, have been the subject…

Read More

What are deceptive design patterns (DDPs)?

Charlotte Henderson and Kaitlyn Clarke Interested in understanding the impacts of AI on your business? Looking to understand how these intersect with concerns around privacy? Curious about the impacts of…

Read More

Effectively identifying and navigating subtle discrimination: A must-do list for employers

By Lynn Iding, CPHR, CCIP and Sheila Mecking Interested in understanding the impacts of subtle discrimination on your business? Curious about the latest legal developments in racial discrimination? Looking to…

Read More

Summary of Bill 14 – Act to Amend the Fair Registration Practices in Regulated Professions Act

By Sheila Mecking and Danielle Bailey-Heelan On March 25, 2025, Bill 14 was introduced by the Acting Minister of Post-Secondary Education, Training and Labour to amend the Fair Registration Practices…

Read More

Enforceable equal wages: More changes for federal employers

BY Tiegan A. Scott & Sophie Poulos

By Tiegan A. Scott and Sophie Poulos The Canada Labour Code (the “Code”) may soon require federally regulated employers to review the wage rates of certain employees under Equal Treatment…

Read More

At a glance: Key changes coming to Prince Edward Island’s Employment Standards Act

Murray L. Murphy, K.C., CPHR and Jacob E. Zelman Prince Edward Island’s new Employment Standards Act (“ESA”) received Royal Assent on November 29, 2024, with an effective date to be to…

Read More

Search Archive