Another week, yet another spurious complaint on a domain name.
This time it was on a client’s one-word dictionary name.
It truly is the definition of whack-a-mole:
The practice of trying to stop problems, etc., that repeatedly occur in an apparently random manner; also, the act of dealing with such matters in a piecemeal manner without achieving a complete solution.
We will always defend these complaints with vigour, but the point is, why should we have to? Particularly for dictionary word domain names that do not do not intentionally infringe on anyone’s Intellectual Property.
In my opinion
auDA and Registrars need to take a different approach to these vexatious eligibility claims.
In the opinion of many, it’s time to rethink and streamline procedures to ensure fair and efficient usage and management of domain name rights.
Currently, with all the steps involved, it wastes everyone’s time and resources.
- Free complaint made online to either the Registrar of record, or to auDA directly. Sometimes complainants use a false name and throwaway email address.
- If it goes to auDA, they on send to Registrar with instructions to contact registrant with a “please explain” within a certain time limit or the domain will be deleted.
- Registrant or their representative then spend time detailing their eligibility by return email.
- Registrar then sends this off to auDA for their determination (email).
- auDA then let’s the Registrar know the outcome (email).
- Registrar then emails Registrant or their representative.
The auDA Compliance team are very fair and good at their job. But no other domain extension in the world puts their registrants to such stressful, unnecessary processes.
If anyone has a genuine complaint about the misuse of a domain name, then they should be prepared to put their name to such a complaint, and pay a small fee (which can be refundable if they are successful). By taking this one step, auDA would see a significant decline in vexatious and spurious complaints.
Best wishes for your online success.