Dribbble Loses Effort to Get Dribble.com via UDRP

A company called Dribbble (notice the 3 “b’s” in its branding) filed a UDRP to try and wrest control of the Dribble.com domain name, which had been owned by the registrant since 1997. As I suspected when I saw the initial UDRP filing, the domain owner won the UDRP proceeding and will be allowed to retain the domain name.

The domain owner has owned Dribble.com for many years. According to the decision, “When the Complaint was filed, the disputed domain name resolved to a website which essentially consisted of pay-per-click links for services such as logo design, website design, illustration design, flyer design, graphic design and the like.” In a UDRP though, the complainant must prove that the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. The first part of that would seem to be impossible given the registration date and the date Dribbble was founded.

Here’s what the panel ruled:

“In the present case, it appears that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in 1997; that is, some 12 years before the Complainant adopted its trademark. There is no suggestion in the record in this case that the Respondent had any notice of the Complainant’s plans. And, as the Respondent notes, the word “dribble” is an ordinary English word. In these circumstances and notwithstanding the manner of use of the disputed domain name made by the Respondent now, a conclusion that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in bad faith is not feasible. “

I was a bit surprised the panel did not rule that this was a case of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH). In my opinion, Dribbble should have known from the start the case was doomed because there is no way the domain owner registered the domain name in bad faith given the date of its founding and when the domain was registered. My reading is that the panelist did not want to give the domain owner a finding of RDNH because of the way the domain name is currently being used, but I disagree.

For those who follow UDRP proceedings, one might think about the importance of the ICA’s successful advocacy for the discrediting of the “Retroactive Bad Faith” (RBF) argument in UDRP proceedings when thinking about this UDRP. There is nothing to indicate that the panelist would have made this ruling, but this seems like the type of UDRP that could have gone the other way if that was an option.

Elliot Silver
Elliot Silver
About The Author: Elliot Silver is an Internet entrepreneur and publisher of DomainInvesting.com. Elliot is also the founder and President of Top Notch Domains, LLC, a company that has closed eight figures in deals. Please read the DomainInvesting.com Terms of Use page for additional information about the publisher, website comment policy, disclosures, and conflicts of interest. Reach out to Elliot: Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn


    • Why would that have been necessary?

      The domain owner self-represented here, and had it gone to court, it could have been much more expensive taken more time, and opened itself up to litigation. The owner could have been countersued under the ACPA and become subjected to financial penalties (up to $100k) in addition to losing the domain name.

      If you were the owner, would you have been willing to spend $25-50k on legal fees (plus potentially opening your company up to financial penalties) when the alternative of defending the UDRP likely cost nothing and resulted in a win?

      If Dribbble were to take this to court, the owner could then countersue for RDNH and everyone spends a lot of money on lawyers.

    • I think the point is there is no repercussion to companies filing frivoulous UDRP’s. A finding of reverse hijacking does nothing really.

    • It stinks, but that is a cost of doing business and a risk of this business. On the other hand, the UDRP is less expensive than litigation and a domain owner who loses in litigation would lose the name and be liable for financial penalty.

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Hilco Digital Assets Announces $10m Investment in Squadhelp

Squadhelp has become a leading brand naming marketplace, connecting business owners and entrepreneurs with domain names listed for sales on its platform. Led by...

Questions Related to Uni —> Afternic Parking Migration

If you are a Uniregistry customer, you most likely received an email explaining the upcoming migration of the Uniregistry Market and parking platform to...

Some Uni-Registered New gTLDs Will be Transferred to 1API

I received an email from Uni (formerly Uniregistry) that I initially thought was a Whois verification email and almost ignored. It was, in fact,...

Advice and Resources for a Newbie Domain Investor

Someone reached out to me on Twitter seeking advice for selling domain names. In a short tweet thread, I shared a few thoughts and...

AI.com Now Forwarding to ChatGPT Website

Early this morning, Andy Booth tweeted about AI.com, asking if the domain name was acquired by ChatGPT. Andy presumably asked because the AI.com domain...