Domain Name Transfers: Dispute Resolution Policy

When a domain name needs to be transferred from one registrar to another, problems can arise between registrars. ICANN, the global organization that “governs” internet identifier naming systems, has a policy for resolving domain transfer disputes between registrars. The procedures apply only after the registrars have made a good faith attempt to solve the problem on their own.

A registrar seeking to file a claim has two options. They can either file a direct claim with the Registry Operator[1] (the top-level domain provider as named by ICANN), or they can file a claim with a Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), which would issue a binding decision, appealable only in a court with proper jurisdiction. Any claim must be brought within 6 months of the alleged violation of transfer policy.

Option 1: Filing with the Registry Operator

Under this scenario, a claim must be submitted electronically to both the Registry and the opposing registrar and must include all relevant information as set out by ICANN. This includes, for example, details of the transfer agreement, contact information for the parties, the grounds for the complaint and the remedy sought, and evidence of the transfer agreement. The responding registrar then has 7 days to respond to each claim and must do so specifically. The Registry Operator then has 14 days to make a decision. Only the losing registrar will be charged a fee, and either registrar can move the proceedings to a court with proper jurisdiction at any time.

Option 2: Dispute Resolution Panel

Under this scenario, the same documentation is required of the registrars under the same timeline. The difference is, the dispute will be judged and decided upon by a DRP—appointed by a Dispute Resolution Provider—within 30 days of receiving the filings. The DRP can either grant or deny the transfer.[2] An appeal can be filed by the losing registrar with a Dispute Resolution Provider within 14 days of the DRP’s decision. The appeal must follow the same conditions as the original claim (electronic form, contact info, etc.). Filing fees are to be determined by the Dispute Resolution Provider, must be paid by the filing registrar, and are reimbursable if they prevail on their claim. Either party may move the proceedings to a court with proper jurisdiction at any time.

This is just a cursory overview of ICANN’s Dispute Resolution Policy. The policy can be found here, but registrars or domain name owners seeking to file a claim should seek the advice of an attorney to help navigate through the ICANN procedures and effectively advocate on their behalf.

[1] A registrar could also file a claim with a Dispute Resolution Provider, however doing so eliminates the chance to appeal a decision from the Provider.

[2] If the transfer has already occurred, but should not have, the DRP can force the return of the domain name back to the original registrar.

Why Domain Transfer Disputes Arise

Domain transfer disputes typically fall into one of several recurring categories. The most common involve unauthorized transfers—situations where a domain name is moved from one registrar to another without the registrant’s knowledge or consent. This can occur through social engineering attacks that trick registrar customer service representatives into initiating a transfer, through compromised registrant account credentials, or through deliberate misconduct by an insider. When a transfer is unauthorized, the registrant’s primary legal remedies run against the gaining registrar and may include a claim under the ACPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d), or a direct UDRP or URS proceeding if trademark rights are at stake.

A second category involves registrar refusals to transfer—the scenario that generated the easyDNS dispute discussed in our related post. A registrar may refuse to process an authorized transfer request, leaving the registrant trapped with a registrar whose services it no longer wants. ICANN’s Transfer Policy sets out the limited circumstances under which a registrar may legitimately refuse a transfer, and registrars that refuse outside those circumstances face dispute resolution proceedings.

A third category involves disputes between registrars about a transfer that has already occurred—for example, when one registrar alleges that a competitor improperly accepted an inbound transfer without the proper authorization code or in violation of the 60-day lock period.

The ICANN Transfer Policy: Permitted Lock Circumstances

ICANN’s Transfer Policy specifies the circumstances under which a registrar may legitimately place a transfer lock on a domain name. These include:

• Within 60 days of the initial registration of the domain name;
• Within 60 days of a prior transfer to the current registrar;
• When a UDRP or URS (Uniform Rapid Suspension) proceeding is pending;
• When the registrant has expressly requested a lock through the registrar’s standard lock mechanism;
• When a court order expressly prohibits the transfer;
• When a valid, verifiable dispute is pending before the registrar (subject to the registrar’s dispute resolution procedures).

Importantly, an informal request from a law enforcement agency does not appear on this list. As confirmed in the easyDNS decision, a court order is required before a registrar may hold a domain transfer based on law enforcement interest. Absent that court order, the registrar has no legitimate basis under the Transfer Policy to refuse.

Domain Transfer Disputes and Registrants: When the TDRP Doesn’t Apply

It is important to understand the scope of ICANN’s Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy (TDRP). The TDRP is a mechanism for disputes between registrars—it is not a mechanism for disputes between a registrant and a registrar, or between a registrant and a third party who has acquired the domain name through theft or fraud.

When a domain name is stolen or fraudulently transferred away from its rightful owner, the registrant’s remedies are found elsewhere. For domain names that implicate trademark rights, the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) allows mark holders to seek transfer through an expedited arbitral proceeding before ICANN-accredited dispute resolution providers such as WIPO or the Forum. The ACPA provides an additional federal court remedy, including civil actions for damages and in rem jurisdiction over the domain name itself in appropriate cases. For outright theft of domain names with no trademark nexus, the registrant may need to pursue claims against the gaining registrar or the fraudulent transferee through litigation.

Practical Guidance: What to Do if Your Domain Is Improperly Locked

If your domain name has been locked by your registrar and you believe the lock is improper, follow these steps:

• Document everything. Take screenshots of your registrar account, the lock status, any communications from the registrar, and any notices you have received from law enforcement or third parties.
• Review the registrar’s terms. Confirm whether the lock was placed pursuant to a ground explicitly authorized under ICANN’s Transfer Policy or the registrar’s own policies.
• Demand written justification. Contact the registrar in writing and ask for the specific legal or contractual basis for the lock. If the registrar cannot point to a court order, an active UDRP proceeding, or another enumerated ground, the lock may be improper.
• File a complaint with ICANN. ICANN has a compliance function that addresses registrar violations of the Transfer Policy. Filing a formal complaint puts the registrar on notice that its conduct is being scrutinized.
• Consult an attorney. ICANN’s TDRP process and the alternatives available to registrants can be complex. An internet attorney can evaluate whether the TDRP, UDRP, ACPA litigation, or another mechanism is the most appropriate vehicle for your specific situation.

Revision Legal’s internet attorneys advise businesses and individuals on domain name disputes, unauthorized transfers, and registrar disputes. Contact us at 855-473-8474 or through the contact form on this page.