<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">

	<channel>

	<title>&#45; CircleID</title>
	<link>https://www.circleid.com/blogs/</link>
	<description>Postings from  on CircleID</description>
	<dc:language>en</dc:language>
	<dc:rights>Copyright 2026, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
	<dc:date>2026-03-31T21:29:00+00:00</dc:date>

	
	<item>
		<title> WIPO Updates GDPR Guidance for UDRP (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20180827_wipo_updates_gdpr_guidance_for_udrp</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20180827_wipo_updates_gdpr_guidance_for_udrp</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Three months after implementation of the European Union's (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO) Arbitration and Mediation Center has expanded and updated its already helpful web page with important questions and answers about how the GDPR is impacting the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20180827_wipo_updates_gdpr_guidance_for_udrp">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> Bitcoin Domain Names Become Popular - and Attract Disputes (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20180208_bitcoin_domain_names_become_popular_and_attract_disputes</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20180208_bitcoin_domain_names_become_popular_and_attract_disputes</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Cryptocurrencies (such as Bitcoin) are all the rage -- so, naturally, related domain name disputes are, too. The wild fluctuations in cryptocurrency prices (Bitcoin hit a low of close to $6,000 this week, after reaching an all-time high of more than $19,000 only two months ago, and less than $1,000 a year ago) have attracted speculators, regulators and now even cybersquatters. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20180208_bitcoin_domain_names_become_popular_and_attract_disputes">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> New UDRP Filing Fees at Czech Arbitration Court (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20180111_new_udrp_filing_fees_at_czech_arbitration_court</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20180111_new_udrp_filing_fees_at_czech_arbitration_court</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The Czech Arbitration Court (CAC) has long offered the least expensive (by far) filing fees for complaints under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), but its fee are about to become more expensive, at least in most cases. CAC's base UDRP filing fee (for a dispute involving up to five domain names and a single-member panel) will increase on February 1, 2018, from 500 euros to 800 euros. As of this writing, that's equivalent to about U.S. $600. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20180111_new_udrp_filing_fees_at_czech_arbitration_court">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> Domain Name Disputes Break Two Records in 2017 (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20180104_domain_name_disputes_break_two_records_in_2017</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20180104_domain_name_disputes_break_two_records_in_2017</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The year 2017 turned out to be a record-setting year for domain name disputes, in two ways: The number of complaints filed as well as the total number of domain names in those complaints. Specifically: The number of cases at WIPO crept up to 3,073 from 3,036 in 2016 (the previous record), a modest gain of just over 1 percent. Those cases included 6,370 domain names, up from 5,354 in 2016 (also a record-setting year), a spike of nearly 19 percent. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20180104_domain_name_disputes_break_two_records_in_2017">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> Another Registrant Loses UDRP Where Trademark 'Spans the Dot' (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20171221_another_registrant_loses_udrp_where_trademark_spans_the_dot</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20171221_another_registrant_loses_udrp_where_trademark_spans_the_dot</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Here's another example of a domain name dispute where the top-level domain (TLD) was essential to the outcome of the case -- because it formed a part of the complainant's trademark: mr.green. In this decision under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), the panel joined a short but (slowly) growing list of disputes in which the TLD plays a vital role. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20171221_another_registrant_loses_udrp_where_trademark_spans_the_dot">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> 'Combosquatting': New Attention for an Old Problem (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20171214_combosquatting_new_attention_for_an_old_problem</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20171214_combosquatting_new_attention_for_an_old_problem</link>
		<description><![CDATA[A study (18-page PDF) from researchers at Georgia Tech and Stony Brook University has attracted attention to what it calls "combosquatting," but the practice has been around since the early days of domain name disputes. The study says combosquatting "refers to the combination of a recognizable brand name with other keywords (e.g., paypal-members.com and facebookfriends.com)." It adds that this practice differs from other types of cybersquatting "in two fundamental ways. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20171214_combosquatting_new_attention_for_an_old_problem">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> Domain Name Disputes Deja Vu: Panavision.com and Panavision.org (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20171130_domain_name_disputes_deja_vu_panavision_dot_com_panavision_dot_org</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20171130_domain_name_disputes_deja_vu_panavision_dot_com_panavision_dot_org</link>
		<description><![CDATA[History, it has been said, repeats itself. The same can be said of domain name disputes, as demonstrated by a pair of cases involving the same trademark ("Panavision") filed more than 20 years apart with remarkably similar facts. I can't hear the name "Panavision" without thinking about the origins of domain name disputes, so a decision involving panavision.org - coming more than two decades after litigation commenced over panavision.com - immediately made me nostalgic. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20171130_domain_name_disputes_deja_vu_panavision_dot_com_panavision_dot_org">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> When UDRP Consolidation Requests Go Too Far (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20171116_when_udrp_consolidation_requests_go_too_far</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20171116_when_udrp_consolidation_requests_go_too_far</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Although including multiple domain names in a single UDRP complaint can be a very efficient way for a trademark owner to combat cybersquatting, doing so is not always appropriate. One particularly egregious example involves a case that originally included 77 domain names -- none of which the UDRP panel ordered transferred to the trademark owner, simply because consolidation against the multiple registrants of the domain names was improper. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20171116_when_udrp_consolidation_requests_go_too_far">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> Apple (Not Surprisingly) is Not a Cybersquatter (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20171109_apple_not_surprisingly_is_not_a_cybersquatter</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20171109_apple_not_surprisingly_is_not_a_cybersquatter</link>
		<description><![CDATA[It's highly unusual for a well-known trademark owner to be accused of cybersquatting, but that's what happened when a Mexican milk producer filed a complaint against Apple Inc. under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (<a href="https://giga.law/blog/2015/10/28/udrp">UDRP</a>) in an attempt to get the domain name lala.com. Not only did Apple win the case, but the panel issued a finding of "reverse domain name hijacking" (RDNH) against the company that filed the complaint. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20171109_apple_not_surprisingly_is_not_a_cybersquatter">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> Confusing Similarity of Domain Names is Only a 'Standing Requirement' Under the UDRP (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20171102_confusing_similarity_of_domains_only_standing_requirement_udrp</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20171102_confusing_similarity_of_domains_only_standing_requirement_udrp</link>
		<description><![CDATA[WIPO's newest overview of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) succinctly states what decisions have made clear through the years: The UDRP's first test is only a "standing requirement." Standing, under the law, simply means that a person or company is qualified to assert a legal right. It does not mean or imply that one will necessarily prevail on any claims. The UDRP includes a well-known three-part test that all trademark owners must satisfy to prevail, but the first element has a low threshold. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20171102_confusing_similarity_of_domains_only_standing_requirement_udrp">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> Popular ccTLDs for Domain Name Disputes (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20171019_popular_cctlds_for_domain_name_disputes</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20171019_popular_cctlds_for_domain_name_disputes</link>
		<description><![CDATA[As I've written before, the registry operators for many country-code top-level domains (ccTLDs) have adopted the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) or a variation of it, while other ccTLDs have crafted their own dispute policies, or none at all. Although no ccTLD appears as frequently as .com in domain name disputes, it's interesting to see which ccTLDs are subject to dispute the most often. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20171019_popular_cctlds_for_domain_name_disputes">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> 'Beyond the Scope' of the UDRP (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20171005_beyond_the_scope_of_the_udrp</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20171005_beyond_the_scope_of_the_udrp</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Not all domain name disputes are appropriate for resolution under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). While the UDRP is clearly the "go-to" legal tool for trademark owners pursuing cybersquatters, some disputes are about larger -- or different -- issues than the UDRP was designed to address. As stated in WIPO's Overview: Depending on the facts and circumstances of a particular case, and irrespective of whether the parties may also be engaged in court litigation... <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20171005_beyond_the_scope_of_the_udrp">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> The Role of Domain Name Privacy and Proxy Services in URS Disputes (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20170925_role_of_domain_name_privacy_and_proxy_services_in_urs_disputes</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20170925_role_of_domain_name_privacy_and_proxy_services_in_urs_disputes</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Here's another apparent limitation of the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS), the domain name dispute policy that applies to the new generic top-level domains (gTLDS): Proceedings are unlikely to unmask cybersquatters hiding behind privacy or proxy services. Domain name registrants often use these privacy and proxy services to hide their identities when they register domain names. The services have legitimate uses but are controversial. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20170925_role_of_domain_name_privacy_and_proxy_services_in_urs_disputes">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> Fighting Phishing with Domain Name Disputes (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20170907_fighting_phishing_with_domain_name_disputes</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20170907_fighting_phishing_with_domain_name_disputes</link>
		<description><![CDATA[I opened an email from GoDaddy over the weekend on my phone. Or so I initially thought. I had recently helped a client transfer a domain name to a GoDaddy account (to settle a domain name dispute), so the subject line of the email -- "Confirm this account" -- simply made me think that I needed to take another action to ensure everything was in working order. But quickly, my radar went off. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20170907_fighting_phishing_with_domain_name_disputes">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> Beware of Extra Fees in UDRP Proceedings (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20170831_beware_of_extra_fees_in_udrp_proceedings</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20170831_beware_of_extra_fees_in_udrp_proceedings</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) is known as an inexpensive alternative to litigation (and that's true), but some proceedings can end up costing a trademark owner more than it may have expected. There are generally two additional types of expenses that can arise during the course of a UDRP proceeding: (1) extra filing fees for certain aspects of a case filed at the Forum, and (2) an increased filing fee if the domain name registrant wants a three-member panel to decide the case. <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20170831_beware_of_extra_fees_in_udrp_proceedings">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	

	</channel>
</rss>