Update: changes affecting how to act on a .global domain flagged by a…

Update: changes affecting how to act on a .global domain flagged by a. UDRP and ccTLD domain recovery and defense across .global. Email the firm to assess your…

A Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) Claims Notice arrives in your inbox. The domain you have just registered – or are about to register – ends in .global, and the notice tells you that a trademark owner has an active entry in the TMCH matching your chosen string. What happens next, and what are your real options?

When a .global domain registration triggers a TMCH Claims Notice, the registrant has acknowledged that a matching trademark exists in the Clearinghouse and accepts the legal risk of proceeding. If a dispute is filed, the available remedy under the Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) is suspension – not transfer – and the standard of proof is clear and convincing evidence, a higher bar than the UDRP's preponderance standard. For brand owners who need a transfer, the UDRP remains the correct route even for .global domains.

This update covers what changed in how TMCH Claims Notices interact with .global registrations, who is affected, and what to do now.

What Changed – and Why .global Matters Now

The .global registry has continued to grow as an alternative to .com for internationally positioned brands and organizations. With that growth, TMCH Claims Notices on .global strings have increased in volume and, in our practice, we are seeing brand owners receive notices in situations they did not expect – including second-level strings that do not appear on their own monitoring lists.

The mechanics have not changed in principle. ICANN's Trademark Clearinghouse, administered in connection with the new gTLD program, requires registries to issue a Claims Notice whenever a new registration matches a TMCH-recorded trademark during the defined Claims Period. What has shifted is the operational pattern: several .global registry-level policy updates have extended or reactivated Claims Period windows, meaning notices that many brand owners assumed had expired are again being triggered. Registrants who receive a notice and proceed are on record as having acknowledged the competing claim. That acknowledgment is relevant evidence in any subsequent dispute.

Who Is Affected?

Two groups face immediate exposure.

Brand owners whose marks are recorded in the TMCH will receive notice when a .global string matching their mark is registered. The notice itself does not stop the registration. It simply creates a documented acknowledgment on the registrant's side. If the registrant proceeds and then uses the domain in a way that conflicts with the mark, the brand owner must still decide whether to file a URS complaint, a UDRP complaint, or both – and those choices carry different consequences.

Registrants who receive a Claims Notice must understand what they are confirming. Proceeding is not automatically wrong – a registrant with a genuine legitimate interest in the string may still register and use the domain lawfully. But proceeding on a string that closely mirrors a well-known trademark, without a credible basis for that use, creates a record that significantly reduces the chance of a successful defense if a complaint follows.

What to Do Now: URS, UDRP, or Neither?

The right tool depends on what you need.

The URS suspends a .global domain for the remainder of its registration term. It does not transfer ownership. The standard – clear and convincing evidence across all three UDRP-like elements – is designed as a rapid, lower-cost mechanism for clear-cut cases of abuse. Where the facts are genuinely unambiguous, URS at WIPO or the Forum can produce a suspension within days of the complaint being accepted. Where the facts are contested or the registrant has any colorable argument, URS often produces a denial – leaving the trademark owner to file a full UDRP complaint at higher cost and with a longer timeline.

The UDRP, also available for .global domains, delivers a transfer order if the complainant proves all three elements of Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy. It takes approximately two months under standard WIPO procedures, with a filing fee starting at USD 1,500 for a single-member panel on one to five domains. If the goal is to own the domain rather than merely suspend it, UDRP is the only arbitral path to that outcome.

In a recent matter – a .global domain claimed by an internationally active organization, spring 2025 – we assessed the TMCH Claims Notice record, concluded that the registrant's acknowledgment significantly weakened any good-faith argument, and filed a UDRP complaint rather than a URS. The transfer order followed within the standard window. That choice – UDRP over URS – was made because the client needed ownership, not temporary suspension.

If neither complaint mechanism applies – for example, if the trademark rights are unclear or the registrant has a strong legitimate-interest argument – the Claims Notice alone does not decide the dispute. A trademark owner without a clear case may be better served by monitoring and waiting for evidence of actual bad-faith use before filing.

For a read on whether the three UDRP elements are met for your .global domain, reach us at info@cognomenlaw.com.

Related at COGNOMEN

• URS and new gTLD dispute services – suspension and recovery across all new extensions
• URS vs. UDRP – choosing the right procedure for a new gTLD domain
• ccTLD mediation and dispute procedures for country-code zones