FAQ: recover a .global domain through a UDRP complaint
FAQ: recover a .global domain through a UDRP complaint. UDRP and ccTLD domain recovery and defense across .global. Email the firm to assess your case.
A brand owner discovers that a stranger registered the .global version of their trademark – and is either parking it, redirecting traffic, or simply sitting on the asset. The question is immediate: does the UDRP apply to .global, and can it force a transfer?
Yes. The .global registry operates under an accreditation agreement that requires UDRP compliance, meaning all three elements of Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy must be proven before a panel will order a transfer or cancellation. A standard case runs approximately two months from filing, and the WIPO filing fee starts at USD 1,500 for a single-member panel on one to five domains. No monetary damages are available – only transfer or cancellation.
The following questions address the most common points practitioners and brand owners raise when considering action against an abusive .global registration.
When can I recover a .global domain through a UDRP complaint?
A UDRP complaint against a .global domain is available whenever the complainant can satisfy all three elements of Paragraph 4(a): the domain is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which the complainant has rights; the registrant has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain; and the domain was registered and is being used in bad faith. All three must be proven – a weak showing on any single element is fatal to the complaint. The .global zone is a new generic top-level domain (new gTLD) and its registry, like all ICANN-accredited new gTLD operators, contractually requires compliance with the UDRP. That makes the process procedurally identical to a .com dispute, with the same evidentiary standard and the same panel-based review.
In practice, the most common triggering scenarios we see are: a domain that replicates a registered mark and resolves to a pay-per-click parking page; a typosquat variant that intercepts brand traffic; or a "passive hold" with no active website but where surrounding circumstances – prior offers to sell, a history of similar registrations, or the registrant's concealment of identity – support bad faith. The Policy's Paragraph 4(b) lists several non-exhaustive bad-faith factors, and panels read them broadly. Registration to sell to the mark owner, to disrupt a competitor, or to attract users by confusion all qualify.
Who can file a UDRP complaint for a .global domain?
Any person or entity with rights in a trademark that the disputed domain allegedly infringes may act as complainant – there is no nationality restriction and no requirement that the mark be registered in the same country as the registrant. Rights in an unregistered (common-law) mark can suffice, provided the complainant demonstrates established secondary meaning. A trademark registration is stronger evidence and simplifies the first element, but the Policy does not require it. What matters is that the rights pre-existed the registration of the disputed .global domain, or that the registrant was clearly aware of the mark at the time of registration. A complainant holding only post-registration trademark rights faces a harder road on the bad-faith element, because the UDRP requires both bad-faith registration and bad-faith use – the "registered AND used" standard is cumulative, not alternative.
Does WIPO or a court decide a .global dispute?
For a .global domain, arbitration before an approved UDRP provider – not a court – is the standard first-line route. WIPO and the Forum together account for roughly 97% of all UDRP proceedings, and either can administer a .global case. The majority of brand-owner complainants select WIPO given its global recognition and published statistics. The WIPO filing fee for one to five domains with a single-member panel is USD 1,500; a three-member panel costs USD 4,000. The Czech Arbitration Court (CAC) offers the lowest entry-point fees among the approved providers and is a legitimate alternative, particularly for cost-sensitive matters. ADNDRC is also available. Courts are not the primary venue: a complainant who wants monetary damages must turn to national anticybersquatting litigation – in the US, for example, an anticybersquatting action in federal court – but that route is substantially more expensive and slower. For a .global domain where transfer is the goal and the bad-faith evidence is clear, the UDRP is almost always the right first step.
Where should you file? The choice of provider matters less than the strength of the complaint itself, but WIPO's published jurisprudential overview gives panels a widely-cited reference that promotes consistency. If the case involves sensitive evidence or a legally complex legitimate-interest defense from the respondent, a three-member panel at WIPO – at USD 4,000 – provides the additional deliberative weight that can be worth the cost.
For a read on whether the three UDRP elements are met in your .global dispute, reach us at info@cognomenlaw.com.
What is the deadline once a case starts?
Once a UDRP provider formally commences a case – which occurs after the complaint passes its administrative compliance review – the registrant has 20 days to file a response. Failure to respond does not mean automatic transfer: the panel still evaluates the complaint on its merits and must independently satisfy itself on all three elements. However, a default significantly reduces the respondent's ability to put legitimate-interest evidence before the panel, and panels regularly draw adverse inferences from silence where the complainant's prima facie case is compelling. From commencement to a final decision, a single-member panel case at WIPO typically concludes within approximately two months absent any procedural detour – an extension request, a request to amend the complaint, or a suspension for settlement talks. WIPO also offers an expedited option delivering a decision within approximately one month for single-panel cases covering up to five domains.
What if the registrant does not respond?
A default by the registrant does not automatically end the case in the complainant's favor. Panels must still find all three Paragraph 4(a) elements proven on the evidence submitted by the complainant. What a default does change is the evidentiary balance: no legitimate-interest arguments, no competing evidence on bad faith, and no factual disputes for the panel to resolve. Panels handling default matters look closely at whether the complainant's own evidence makes a self-consistent case. Weak evidence of bad faith – a parking page with no other context, for example – has led panels to deny complaints even when the respondent was absent. The lesson for complainants: prepare the complaint as though the respondent will mount a defense, because the panel's scrutiny does not relax simply because the other side is silent.
Can the decision be appealed or challenged?
There is no appeal within the UDRP. Once a panel issues a transfer or cancellation order, the losing party's primary recourse is to commence court proceedings in a competent jurisdiction before the registrar implements the order. Most registrars apply a brief implementation window – commonly around ten business days after the decision is transmitted – during which a party may file a court action and request a stay. After implementation, a court action to reverse the transfer remains possible but is procedurally more complex. Separately, a respondent who believes the complaint was filed in bad faith – to deprive a legitimate registrant of a domain they properly hold – may seek a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH). An RDNH finding carries no monetary penalty under the Policy, but it is a published reputational sanction against the complainant and its counsel. We regularly advise registrants who receive abusive complaints on whether an RDNH argument is supported by the record.
What evidence decides the outcome of a .global UDRP complaint?
The three UDRP elements each demand specific evidence. On the first element, the complainant needs proof of trademark rights – a registration certificate, evidence of common-law use, or both – and must show the domain is identical or confusingly similar. On the second element, evidence that the registrant is not commonly known by the domain name, has no active bona-fide offering, and received no license from the complainant is the standard approach; panels treat this as a burden that shifts to the respondent once the complainant makes a prima facie case. The third element is usually the hardest. Panels look for direct evidence of bad intent – an offer to sell, a pattern of abusive registrations, content designed to mislead users, or a prior dispute history – and for circumstantial evidence: the strength of the complainant's mark, the timing of the registration relative to the mark's prominence, the use (or deliberate non-use) of the domain, and WHOIS privacy or identity concealment.
In a matter we handled in spring 2025 (a .global domain registered days after a major brand announced a product launch in the same sector), the registration timing and the immediate redirection to a competing pay-per-click page were sufficient to establish bad faith, despite the registrant's claim of an independent business rationale. The complaint succeeded on a standard single-member panel, and the transfer was implemented within approximately nine weeks of filing.
To assess the three UDRP elements in your .global case and select the right forum and panel composition, email info@cognomenlaw.com.
Related at COGNOMEN
When can I recover a .global domain through a UDRP complaint?
A .global domain can be recovered through a UDRP complaint when all three Paragraph 4(a) elements are satisfied: the domain is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the complainant has rights, the registrant holds no legitimate interest, and the domain was both registered and used in bad faith. The .global zone is a new gTLD under ICANN accreditation, meaning the UDRP applies exactly as it does to .com. The only available remedies are transfer or cancellation; no monetary award is possible under the Policy.
Who can recover a .global domain through a UDRP complaint for a .global domain?
Any trademark holder – registered or common-law – may file a UDRP complaint against an abusive .global registration, with no restriction on nationality or jurisdiction. A registered mark simplifies proof of the first element. Critically, the bad-faith standard is cumulative: the domain must have been registered and used in bad faith. A complainant whose mark postdates the registration faces a materially harder case and should take specialist advice before filing.
What is the deadline once a case starts?
Once a UDRP provider formally commences the case, the registrant has 20 days to file a response. A standard single-member panel case at WIPO concludes within approximately two months of commencement. WIPO also offers an expedited option of roughly one month for cases involving up to five domains on a single-member panel. Failure to respond within the deadline means the panel proceeds on the record as submitted by the complainant.
COGNOMEN is an independent boutique focused exclusively on domain-name disputes. We recover, defend, and transact internet domains across generic and country-code zones, before WIPO, the Forum, CAC, ADNDRC, and national procedures, and in court where arbitration cannot reach. We act for brand owners, domain investors, and registrants – including respondent-side defense and reverse domain name hijacking. COGNOMEN handles domain disputes exclusively, across gTLDs and ccTLDs, with direct experience in new-gTLD disputes including .global, .online, and comparable zones. To discuss a domain, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.
Disclaimer: This article is general information about domain-name dispute procedures and does not constitute legal advice. Outcomes depend on the specific facts, the zone, and panel or court discretion. For advice on your domain, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.
Speak with Cognomen Law
For a scoped view of your domain matter, contact info@cognomenlaw.com. Discuss your matter
Related
This publication is general information and does not constitute legal advice. For advice on your situation, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.