UDRP Evidence Checklist: Building a Winning Domain Dispute Case
Comprehensive guide to gathering and presenting evidence in UDRP domain disputes. Learn what documentation panels expect, common pitfalls to avoid, and how to build a compelling case for domain transfer.
UDRP Evidence Checklist: Building a Winning Domain Dispute Case
Introduction
Winning a UDRP domain dispute (or defending against one) hinges on evidence. The UDRP process is document-driven and akin to a fast-track legal proceeding where there’s no live testimony or discovery – so the panel’s decision will be based entirely on the submitted evidence and arguments.
This checklist covers the key types of evidence a complainant (trademark owner) should assemble to maximise chances of success, as well as considerations for respondents. We also include insights from UDRP panel guidance on evidentiary standards, ensuring you focus on what really matters to panelists.
1. Evidence of Trademark Rights
Prove you have a legitimate mark. This is the first UDRP element: the domain must be identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which you have rights.
Ideal Evidence Includes:
- Trademark registration certificates from relevant national IP offices (e.g., USPTO, EUIPO). These are gold-standard proof of rights. Attach a clear copy or provide registration numbers for panel verification.
- Common law trademark evidence (if claiming unregistered rights): longstanding use, media coverage, sales figures, consumer recognition. Include examples of the mark in use (advertisements, website screenshots, brochures).
- Entity verification: Ensure the name on the trademark matches or is legally connected to the complainant entity. If the trademark owner is different, provide a licence or assignment document.
Pro Tip
Check the WIPO Global Brand Database or USPTO TESS for any trademarks identical to the domain name. If a registration exists (yours or even someone else’s), panels have considered that.
2. Evidence of Respondent’s Lack of Rights or Legitimate Interests
This is often the trickiest part. You must make a prima facie case that the domain owner has no rights or legitimate interests in the name.
Key Evidence Points:
No Trademark or Business Name
Search trademark databases for the respondent’s name or the domain term; show that there’s no evidence the respondent is commonly known by the domain.
No Legitimate Use of the Domain
Check how the domain is used. Include screenshots of the website (or lack thereof):
- Parked with pay-per-click ads: Capture those ads, especially if they relate to your industry or competitors
- Redirecting to another site: Note where (especially if it goes to a competitor)
- Inactive: Inactivity doesn’t automatically prove no legitimate interest, but combined with other factors can support your case
No Authorisation
State (via declaration in your complaint) that you never licensed or permitted the respondent to use your trademark.
Respondent’s History
If the same respondent has lost previous UDRP cases or has a known cybersquatting history, include those case references.
3. Evidence of Registration and Use in Bad Faith
This is the heart of many disputes. You must prove the domain was both registered and used in bad faith.
Key Evidence Categories:
Timing Evidence
Show that your trademark rights predate the domain’s registration. Provide:
- Domain’s creation date (from WHOIS/RDAP records)
- Your trademark’s first use or registration date
- Comparison showing your mark significantly pre-dates the domain
Intent to Sell
Evidence includes any offer to sell or solicitations:
- Copies of emails or forum messages where respondent contacted you
- Screenshots of sale listings on marketplaces like Sedo, Afternic
- “Buy now” banners on parked pages
Pay-Per-Click (PPC) Ads or Competing Use
If the domain hosts ads, especially ones related to your industry or competitors, capture them. Panels have found bad faith when parked pages capitalise on the trademark’s meaning.
Pattern of Squatting
If the respondent has multiple domains of others’ trademarks, gather that information:
- Google their email or name plus “domain dispute”
- Reverse WHOIS searches
- Prior UDRP cases they’ve lost
False WHOIS or Concealing Identity
While using privacy services isn’t bad faith per se, some panels consider intentional WHOIS misinformation as supporting bad faith.
4. Additional Supporting Evidence
Content Analysis
If the domain’s website copies your branding, logo, or text – include screenshots. This shows intent to impersonate or confuse users.
Communications from Respondent
Save any correspondence where respondents make admissions or threats. However, be careful with settlement communications as panels differ on considering these.
Historical Usage
Use archive.org to show what was on the site at various dates. If content was minimal until after they got a complaint, that’s telling.
Evidentiary Standards and Panel Expectations
UDRP panels decide on the written record alone, usually applying the “balance of probabilities” standard. This means you don’t have to prove beyond all doubt, just that it’s more likely than not that each element is satisfied.
However, panels emphasise that unsubstantiated allegations are not enough. As UDRP commentary notes: “To allow a party to merely make factual claims without any supporting evidence would essentially eviscerate the requirements of the Policy.”
What This Means in Practice:
- If you claim “the respondent must have known of my mark because I’m famous,” provide evidence of that fame
- If you claim “the respondent offered to sell me the domain,” provide the actual email
- Panels do not guess or assume facts not in evidence
Final Check Before Filing
Go through your assembled evidence and organise it clearly in the complaint with exhibits. Label each exhibit clearly and reference them in your arguments so the panel can easily verify each factual claim.
Create a Timeline
Include a brief chronology: Date of first trademark use → Date of trademark registration → Date of domain registration → Date of problematic use → Date of C&D sent, etc.
Address Any Red Flags
If you find issues in your review (like the domain predating your mark), address them directly rather than hiding from them.
Conclusion
A UDRP case can be won or lost on the strength of evidence. By following this checklist, you cover all bases: establishing your rights, demonstrating the respondent’s lack of rights, and proving bad faith.
Always err on the side of providing more concrete evidence rather than less – panels will appreciate a well-documented complaint. In the words of one UDRP panel, “the burden of proof may be on the complainant, but meeting it is not difficult when the complainant submits sufficient evidence and the respondent provides none”.
Make it easy for the panel to decide in your favour by giving them the evidence they need to confidently rule that the respondent is a cybersquatter under the Policy.