If a UK domain name owned by someone else is similar to a business's own name or trading style, the business can seek to have the domain name transferred to it by making a complaint to Nominet UK through its Dispute Resolution Service (DRS). To succeed in a DRS complaint, the business must show that it has rights in a name or mark similar to the domain name and that the domain name is an abusive registration in the hands of the owner. A membership organisation for finance providers recently succeeded in having a domain name transferred to it.
The organisation was the national membership body for Community Development Finance Institutions – non-profit and community lenders established as alternatives to 'payday' lenders. Although its trading name had since changed, it had traded as the Community Development Finance Association for more than two decades until the early 2020s. It had held the domain name cdfa.org.uk since 2002 but had recently allowed it to lapse. The domain name had subsequently been registered by another individual and had redirected to the website of an entity describing itself as a credit broker for small loans. The membership organisation brought a DRS complaint.
The Nominet expert found that the organisation clearly had unregistered rights in the name 'CDFA', built up through use over two decades and reflected in widespread recognition in the financial inclusion and community finance sector. Aside from the .org.uk suffix, that name was identical to the domain name.
The organisation pointed to two factors indicating that the domain name was an abusive registration. The individual was using it in a way which had confused or was likely to confuse people or businesses into believing it was connected with the organisation. Alternatively, the individual had registered or otherwise acquired it for the purpose of unfairly disrupting the organisation's business. The expert considered that both of those factors applied in this case.
While the expert rejected the organisation's argument that the domain name had been registered in bad faith, he noted that a complainant does not have to establish bad faith in order for a DRS complaint to succeed.
The expert considered that, in potentially both confusing internet users and riding off the back of the organisation's reputation, the registration and use of a domain name identical to the name in which the organisation had rights had plainly taken unfair advantage of those rights. The expert found the registration to be abusive and directed that the domain name be transferred to the organisation.