How to recover a .it domain after a failed buy-back negotiation
A seller names a price. You decline, or you counter, and the negotiation collapses. Now the .it domain that carries your brand, your product name, or your Italian market presence sits in a stranger's hands — pointed at a parking page, a competitor's site, or nothing at all. The buy-back route is closed. What comes next?
To recover a .it domain after a failed buy-back negotiation, the primary formal route is the Procedura di Riassegnazione (Reassignment Procedure) administered by the Registro.it registry through its designated dispute-resolution service providers. Where the domain is also registered in a gTLD such as .com, the UDRP applies to that registration in parallel. Both procedures require proof that the registrant holds no legitimate interest and acted abusively — broadly analogous to, though distinct from, the three UDRP elements. A standard .it reassignment case is typically resolved in a matter of months, with an official filing fee well below typical litigation costs.
This page explains the .it Reassignment Procedure, how it compares to the UDRP for any parallel gTLD registration, what evidence decides these cases, and how to take the next step when a buy-back has already failed.
Why a failed buy-back negotiation changes the dispute calculus
When buy-back talks collapse, two things happen simultaneously. First, the registrant now has documentary proof that you want the domain — which, in the wrong hands, becomes leverage for a higher demand later. Second, any further informal approach risks the appearance of acquiescence. Acting through formal channels is no longer a preference. It is a strategic necessity.
In our practice, we regularly advise brand owners who arrive at this point after weeks or months of failed negotiation. The pattern is consistent: an initial contact, a five- or six-figure asking price, a breakdown, and then uncertainty about what formal remedy — if any — exists for a ccTLD. The answer, for .it, is that a specific national procedure exists and it has real teeth.
A failed negotiation is not wasted time, however. Correspondence in which the registrant demanded payment above documented costs, offered to sell specifically to you as the trademark holder, or acknowledged your brand rights can constitute strong bad-faith evidence in the formal proceeding. Preserve every email, every message, every screenshot of the conversation. That record becomes part of the evidentiary file.
For an assessment of your .it domain dispute, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.
What governs .it domain disputes — the Reassignment Procedure explained
The .it Reassignment Procedure (Procedura di Riassegnazione) is the designated dispute mechanism for the .it zone, administered by Registro.it and conducted through accredited dispute-resolution bodies. It is not the UDRP. The UDRP applies only to gTLD registrations and to the ccTLDs that have formally adopted it — .it has not. Applying UDRP analysis directly to a .it case leads to procedural misfiling and wasted time.
The .it procedure asks, in substance, whether the complainant holds rights in a name or mark that the domain reproduces or imitates, and whether the registration was made or is maintained in bad faith — meaning without a legitimate interest and in a manner that exploits or damages those rights. The standard tracks the broad logic of UDRP Paragraph 4(a) without being identical to it. A brand owner who would succeed under the UDRP will generally satisfy the .it test, but the procedural rules, the evidence format, and the panel's analytical approach differ in important respects.
The remedy, if the complaint succeeds, is reassignment of the domain to the complainant — the .it equivalent of transfer. Cancellation is also available where the complainant does not hold the eligibility to register a .it domain (a requirement linked to EU/EEA nexus or other qualifying connection to Italy). Monetary damages are not available through this procedure. Costs are not awarded to the prevailing party. The proceeding is administrative, not judicial.
One material difference from the UDRP: the .it procedure does not carry a universally recognized Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) concept in the same explicit form. Panels can and do find that a complaint was filed without legitimate basis, but the formal RDNH finding and the reputational consequence it carries in the UDRP world do not automatically translate. Respondents defending a .it complaint should nonetheless document their good-faith registration clearly — the reasoning matters for any subsequent proceedings.
How does the .it test apply when a buy-back demand preceded the filing?
A prior buy-back demand by the registrant is one of the most useful evidentiary facts in a .it reassignment case. It maps directly onto the bad-faith indicators that panels examine: did the registrant register the domain primarily to sell it to the trademark holder for more than documented out-of-pocket costs? Did the registrant make a specific offer that referenced the complainant's brand or mark? Was the price demand wholly disproportionate to the registration cost?
Affirmative answers to those questions — supported by the actual correspondence — establish an evidentiary foundation that is difficult for a registrant to rebut. Panels have consistently held, across both UDRP and equivalent ccTLD proceedings, that an unsolicited demand to sell a domain incorporating another party's mark, at a price far exceeding registration costs, is a strong indicator of bad-faith purpose.
What the complainant still must show is trademark rights. A registered Italian or EU trademark covering the relevant goods or services is the strongest foundation. An unregistered mark may suffice if there is clear evidence of commercial reputation in Italy — sales figures, press coverage, distributor agreements — but the evidentiary burden for an unregistered mark is materially higher. We advise clients to audit their trademark portfolio before filing, because a weak rights position can undermine an otherwise strong bad-faith case.
The registrant's legitimate-interest question is typically the easiest element where the domain is an exact or near-exact match of a distinctive mark and the registrant has no plausible connection to the name. A parking page, a redirect to unrelated content, or a blank page supports the complainant's position. Evidence that the registrant operated a business under the name before any contact with you would cut the other way.
Should you use the .it Reassignment Procedure, the UDRP, or both?
The right route depends on where the registrations sit and what outcome you need.
If the only problem registration is the .it domain itself, the Reassignment Procedure is the correct and only administrative option. The UDRP has no jurisdiction over .it. Filing a UDRP complaint against a .it domain registration would be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction at the outset.
If the same registrant also holds a .com, .net, or other gTLD variant of your mark — a common pattern in brand-squatting campaigns — you can pursue the UDRP against those gTLD registrations in parallel. WIPO and the Forum both administer UDRP proceedings. A WIPO single-member panel complaint for one to five domains carries a filing fee of USD 1,500, and a standard case is typically resolved in about two months. Running the .it Reassignment and the UDRP concurrently requires coordinating the evidentiary records, because a decision in one proceeding may become part of the record in the other.
If you want monetary damages — not just the domain — neither the Reassignment Procedure nor the UDRP reaches money. A court action under applicable Italian or EU law is the only route to a damages remedy. That is a substantially more resource-intensive path, handled with local litigation counsel in the relevant jurisdiction, and is usually pursued only where the commercial harm is large enough to justify the cost and time.
In a recent matter (a .it and .com double registration, spring 2025), we filed the .it Reassignment and a parallel UDRP complaint for the .com within the same week. The registrant had sent a buy-back demand approximately four times the documented registration cost before any formal contact from the brand owner. The buy-back correspondence anchored the bad-faith analysis in both proceedings, and the .com was ordered transferred within the standard two-month window. The .it case resolved on a comparable timeline through the national procedure.
What evidence do you need to recover a .it domain after a failed buy-back negotiation?
Evidence in a .it reassignment case falls into three categories: rights evidence, bad-faith evidence, and negative evidence (showing the registrant lacks a legitimate interest).
Rights evidence starts with the trademark certificate. For an EU trade mark registered at the EUIPO, a printout of the registration record is straightforward to produce. For an Italian national mark, the equivalent certificate from the UIBM suffices. If you rely on unregistered rights, you need commercial use evidence predating the domain registration: sales invoices, advertising records, press citations, or distributor agreements in the Italian market. The earlier and more consistent the use, the stronger the position.
Bad-faith evidence in a post-negotiation case is largely in the correspondence itself. Preserve the original emails, any WhatsApp or Signal messages, any intermediary communications. Record when the first contact was made and by whom. Note the asking price and any progression of offers. Note any explicit reference by the registrant to your brand or trademark — that acknowledgment is particularly useful. Screenshots of the domain's DNS records and any content it pointed to at the time of the demand are also relevant.
Negative evidence — showing the registrant has no legitimate interest — typically comes from a WHOIS/RDDS search showing no business by that name in Italy, a trademark register search showing no prior rights, and screenshots of the domain's historical content through an archival service. An absence of use is relevant, but it is the absence of a legitimate use that matters. A parking page with pay-per-click links is particularly telling; it is a commercial use without a plausible legitimate basis in the name.
To weigh UDRP against the .it Reassignment Procedure for your case, email info@cognomenlaw.com.
What happens after you file — process and timeline
Once a .it Reassignment complaint is filed with the designated dispute-resolution provider, the provider reviews the complaint for formal compliance, then serves it on the registrant. The registrant is given a set period to submit a response. If no response is filed, the case proceeds on a default basis — which typically (though not invariably) favors the complainant where the evidentiary record supports the claim.
A single-panelist or three-panelist expert then reviews the record and issues a reasoned decision. The decision is delivered to both parties and to Registro.it. If the complainant succeeds, Registro.it implements the reassignment after a short implementation period, subject to any suspension for a court challenge by the registrant. A registrant who objects to the administrative outcome may pursue a court action, which would stay the transfer pending the court's ruling.
The full timeline — from filing a formally compliant complaint to implementation — is typically measured in months rather than weeks, though simpler default cases can move faster. This is meaningfully shorter than Italian court litigation, which can extend to years at first instance. For brand owners who need the domain returned to their control without protracted delay, the administrative route is almost always the better first step.
We prepare the complaint, assemble the evidentiary annexes, coordinate with the dispute-resolution body, and monitor the implementation stage through Registro.it — so the brand owner does not need to manage the procedural mechanics directly.
How do costs break down in a .it recovery after a failed buy-back?
The cost of a .it reassignment has two components: the official dispute-resolution body fee and the legal preparation fee.
Official fees for .it reassignment proceedings are set by the designated service providers and are published on their respective websites. They are generally modest in the context of domain disputes — comparable to the lower end of UDRP filing costs — but the precise current figure should be confirmed with the relevant provider at the time of filing, as fee schedules are updated periodically. We verify the current fee and include it in the cost estimate we provide before any engagement.
Legal preparation fees for a straightforward single-domain case — complaint drafting, evidence compilation, and filing — sit in a market range broadly comparable to UDRP work. For UDRP matters at WIPO or the Forum, that market range is commonly in the USD 3,000 – 7,000 band for a flat-fee engagement on a straightforward single-domain case, separate from the forum filing fee. .it Reassignment work is comparable in scope, and we quote a fixed fee before any instruction so there are no billing surprises.
If a parallel UDRP complaint for a gTLD registration is filed at the same time, the combined official cost includes the .it provider fee plus the WIPO or Forum filing fee. Running both simultaneously adds efficiency on the evidentiary side — the core record is built once — while the official fees are additive. In our experience, the total official outlay for a dual .it and .com filing is still well within the range that a brand owner would spend on a single round of buy-back negotiations with a determined seller.
In a second recent matter (a .it typosquat in the food-and-beverage sector, autumn 2024), the registrant had quoted a six-figure buy-back price before any formal approach. The combined cost of the .it Reassignment and a parallel UDRP complaint for the equivalent .com was a fraction of that demand — and both proceedings resolved in favor of the brand owner without any settlement payment to the registrant.
Related at COGNOMEN
Frequently asked questions
How do I start to recover a .it domain after a failed buy-back negotiation?
The first step is an assessment of the three practical questions: do you hold trademark or other rights in the name, does the registrant appear to lack a legitimate interest, and is there evidence of bad-faith purpose — including any buy-back demand above documented costs? If those boxes are checked, a formal .it Reassignment complaint can be filed with a designated dispute-resolution provider. We assess the merits, prepare the evidentiary file, and file the complaint. Contact info@cognomenlaw.com to begin that review.
What are the realistic outcomes when you recover a .it domain after a failed buy-back negotiation?
The available remedies through the .it Reassignment Procedure are reassignment of the domain to the complainant or cancellation of the registration. Monetary compensation is not available through this route. If the complainant's rights and the registrant's bad faith are clearly established — particularly where the buy-back correspondence survives as evidence — reassignment is the typical outcome in a well-prepared case. However, outcomes depend on the specific facts, the panel's assessment of the record, and any response the registrant files. No outcome is guaranteed.
How do fees split if the case escalates?
If the .it Reassignment outcome is contested by the registrant in an Italian court, the administrative proceeding and the court action run on separate cost bases. The court action involves litigation fees paid to local litigation counsel in the relevant jurisdiction and standard Italian court costs — both of which vary significantly by the complexity of the claim and the court involved. If a parallel UDRP complaint for a gTLD domain is filed, that carries its own official fee: USD 1,500 for a WIPO single-member panel covering one to five domains. We set out all projected costs before any engagement.
Author: Cordelia Roe — UDRP complainant practice & gTLD recovery; domain transactions and brand protection. Meet the team.
Speak with Cognomen Law
For a scoped view of your domain matter, contact info@cognomenlaw.com. Discuss your matter
This publication is general information and does not constitute legal advice. For advice on your situation, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.