Is Domains By Proxy Guilty of Cybersquatting? When the domain registrant hides their WhoIs contact data under proxy ..

We regularly get calls from companies whose trademarks are being cybersquatted on domain names where the WhoIs (domain registrant / owner) information is protected by a proxy service, such as Domains By Proxy. Typically, the proxy service is requested pursuant to the RAA to unlock the privacy protect service upon reasonable evidence of actionable harm has been provided, thus revealing the name and contact information for the true registrant. But what happens if the proxy does not unlock the WhoIs data?

Baylor University v. Domains By Proxy, Inc., et.al., FA0802001145654 (Nat Arb. Forum Mar. 25, 2008) Name of Registrant at the time of filing of the Complaint was Domains By Proxy. After filing of Complaint, GoDaddy.com confirmed with the NAF that the various domain names were registered in the names of various different registrants. NAF requested that Complainant amend its Complaint to choose which Respondent and corresponding domain name to remove from the complaint. Complainant amended its Complaint, but Complainant contended that Domains by Proxy is the proper Respondent, and did eventually include them as one of the Respondents. There were facts in the record that indicated Domains By Proxy refused to give up the identities of the true registrants of the domain names even after formal requests by Complainant, and only did so after the UDRP was filed. As a result, the Panel in the proceeding found that Domains By Proxy was the proper Respondent in the case, since it was the Registrant named in the WHOIS registration information in relating to all of the disputed domains names when the Complaint was filed.

Here is a list of WIPO and NAF UDRP decisions where Domains By Proxy has been named as the Respondent.