discuss UDRP Maximum Costs to Respondents

[Charac]

Outside of respondent's own attorney fees (if they choose to use one). Would it be safe to say that there are no other financial costs associated with the process?

Is it true claimants cannot be awarded damages? Or recoup filing fees regardless of the number of domains or panelists involved? These are all claimant's responsibility?

Also, is a respondent obligated to make a formal reply -- when they decide to cancel or transfer domain? Can giving such notice be enough?

 

[jberryhill]

Outside of respondent's own attorney fees (if they choose to use one). Would it be safe to say that there are no other financial costs associated with the process?

If the Complainant has selected a single member panel, and the Respondent wants a three member panel, then the Respondent has to pay half the three member panel fee. There are significant differences in outcomes in three member panel cases.

Is it true claimants cannot be awarded damages? Or recoup filing fees regardless of the number of domains or panelists involved? These are all claimant's responsibility?

There are no monetary awards. The UDRP providers have significant differences concerning refundability of fees in certain instances.

Also, is a respondent obligated to make a formal reply -- when they decide to cancel or transfer domain? Can giving such notice be enough?

A respondent is not obligated to reply. If the respondent would prefer to transfer the domain name, then each provider has their own mechanism for implementing UDRP Rule 17 - which outlines a procedure for doing that. No, giving notice is not enough.

 

[Charac]

... The UDRP providers have significant differences concerning refundability of fees in certain instances.

You must mean due claimant by an unsuccesful respondant (maybe I'm resisting this concept a little here) ?

Do you happen to know where I can find out more about refund policies of individual UDRP providers?
Is there a single source you might be able to point to?

So the way I understand it, when the domain is cancelled or transferred this amounts to no respondant costs incurred. Unleses the UDRP provider has a fee for implementing Rule 17?

Of course, I have seen mention of "administrative costs" by certain registrars. If this is what they could be partially referring to.

John Berryhill - I want you to know how much I value your help with this, as with all your insight. I think at one stage you mentioned you've been doing this for about two-and-a-half decades. By weird coincidence, the only marks I have had registered (by attorney) filed near the same time. But from then on, I seem to have forgotten what meager amounts got me by whereas you however went to the other end of the spectrum.
- Thanks so much and appreciate your patience!

 

[jberryhill]

You must mean due claimant by an unsuccesful respondant (maybe I'm resisting this concept a little here) ?

They are all free to set their own fee structures. WIPO charges $1500 for a single member panel complaint. If the complaint is withdrawn before a panel is appointed, such as by the parties agreeing to a rule 17 transfer, then the complainant is refunded $1000. If the Respondent pays $2000 for a three member panel proceeding, but the parties agree on withdrawal, then the Respondent is refunded the $2000 (and the Complainant is refunded $1000).

Do you happen to know where I can find out more about refund policies of individual UDRP providers?

All of their fee policies are explained at their websites.

So the way I understand it, when the domain is cancelled or transferred this amounts to no respondant costs incurred.

The UDRP providers don't have any mechanism for making the Respondent pay anything. So if a Panel for which the Complainant paid (whether they paid for a single member panel or a three member panel) decides to deny the complaint, cancel the name, or transfer the name, it's not as if the UDRP provider has any way to collect a fee from the Respondent. Most Respondents don't show up anyway.

Unleses the UDRP provider has a fee for implementing Rule 17?

None that I know of. It would be kind of silly to charge a fee for that. Because the Respondent could then simply file a Response saying, "Please transfer the domain name" and most panelists will simply do that. Now, the NAF will pocket ALL of the complainant's filing fee when that happens, but...

I really don't understand your interest in the topic. If you are a domain investor, it's not as if you get to pick the UDRP provider through which someone files a complaint against your domain name.

Is there a single source you might be able to point to?

Yes. Me. I charge a reasonable hourly rate or can quote a flat fee for answering your highly specific questions about UDRP provider policies, but I don't offer refunds.

Either you have received a UDRP, in which case the only policies of interest are those of the UDRP provider in qutestion; or you are contemplating filing a UDRP, in which case the edge cases in which fees are refundable is hardly your biggest practical concern.

But I don't understand the general practical value of this discussion.

 

[Charac]

...But I don't understand the general practical value of this discussion.

Re-evaluating a number of unused domains I hold, I've discovered a few that have potentially greater risk than first thought. I'm simply forming a game plan ahead of time. Based on costs, whether to: hold onto a given name, be prepared to respond to a UDRP or maybe delete it ahead-of-time based on costs involved.

You clarified my questions (overall that respondents can't be on the hook for more than they entered into, perhaps to the exclusion of attorney fees, including that refunds can't cross paths while charging respondents).

Thank you.