In 2019, we've seen a surge in domain name system (DNS) hijacking attempts and have relayed warnings from the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, U.K.'s Cybersecurity Centre, ICANN, and other notable security experts. Although the topic has gained popularity amongst CIOs and CISOs, most companies are still overlooking important security blind spots when it comes to securing their digital assets outside the enterprise firewalls -- domains, DNS, digital certificates.
The conduct that reverse domain name hijacking (RDNH) was crafted to punish is "using the [Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy] in bad faith to attempt to deprive a registered domain-name holder of a domain name." There are several variations ranging from the plain vanilla, claims that should never have been brought – mark owners whose rights postdate the registration of the challenged domain name as in Vudu, Inc. v. WhoisGuard, Inc. / K Blacklock, D2019-2247...
In the absence of data on renewals and deletions which are yet to happen, it can be enlightening to compare the domain names from the zone files of a year ago to the domain names in the current zones. The first group is the legacy gTLDs. The "Retained" domain names are those still in the December 2019 zone files. The "Deleted" domain names are those which are no longer in the current zones. Some of the retained domain names may have been reregistered, but these are not renewals charts.
Domain names can be valuable assets, but many corporate domain name portfolios consist of non-resolving domains. In a recent survey conducted by Brandsight, more than 91% of domain professionals said that ensuring domains redirect to relevant content was an extremely important or somewhat important goal. That said, it's not uncommon for less than half of corporate domain name portfolios to point to live content.
The implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and ICANN's conservative temporary policy, which favors privacy and limits registrar liability, has made domain enforcement against cybersquatters, cyber criminals and infringement more difficult, expensive and slow. With heightened concerns over privacy following high-profile breaches of consumer data and its subsequent illicit use and distribution, there is no question that consumer data protection practices would come under scrutiny.
The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, commonly known as the UDRP, was first introduced on October 24, 1999, by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). The UDRP is incorporated by reference into Registration Agreements for all generic top-level domain names (gTLDs) and some country-code top-level domain names (ccTLDs).
Like the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) is consensus-driven; from the bottom up, not the top down. The result is a jurisprudence of domain names that develops in common-law fashion through Panel decisions that over time and through "deliberative conversations" among panelists resolve into consensus.
Brandsight recently concluded their Third Annual Domain Management Survey. Designed to uncover issues of greatest concern to corporate domain name professionals, the survey was sent to more than 300 companies. The companies that responded spanned all verticals, ranging from financial services to high-tech to consumer packaged goods. Of those that responded, 18% had portfolios smaller than 500 domains...
Domain Names composed of generic terms and combinations – dictionary words, random letters, and short strings – have achieved ascending values in the secondary market. DNJournal.com (Ron Jackson) reports on his year to date chart, for example (just a random sampling from the charts) in August 2019 joyride.com was sold for $300,000, in June voice.com sold for $30 million, in July rx.com sold for $1 million, and in January california.com sold for $3 million... The magnitude of the reported sales suggests that businesses have come to depend on resellers than go to the trouble of inventing brand names from scratch.
InvenTel makes security cams for cars. It is trying to crack down on Chinese counterfeiters. It brought a prior lawsuit against a wide range of defendants, including GoDaddy. InvenTel voluntarily dismissed GoDaddy from that suit. It brought a second round of litigation involving a new counterfeit site allegedly by the same bad guys, www.hdminorcarnbuy.com, a domain name registered via GoDaddy.