The Policy requires complainants to prove that they have "rights in respect of a name or mark which is identical or similar to the domain name". The policy defines 'rights' as "includes, but not limited to, rights enforceable under English law. However, a Complainant will be unable to rely on rights in a name or term which is wholly descriptive of the Complainant's business".

Your Questions Answered

What is the rights test for?

The main point of the test is to make sure that the person who complains is someone with a proper interest in the complaint. The rights test is "not a particularly high threshold test" (according to the appeal panel in DRS 00248 seiko-shop.co.uk).

However, some complainants do fail this test, and it is important to provide evidence of the rights you are claiming.

Do I need a trade mark?

No. The DRS does not specifically require you have a trade mark (registered or unregistered). A trade mark of any type might be helpful in demonstrating rights in the disputed domain name, but is not required. In a survey conducted by Nominet 56% of the DRS parties who answered did not hold a registered trademark. Complainants and respondents with trademarks should remember that in order to be successful, a complainant must demonstrate both rights in the disputed domain name and abusive registration. Trademark holders should also remember to include a copy of the trademark certificate with their submission (complaint, response or reply).

What other rights will do?

The definition covers all rights enforceable at English law, so contract rights can be enough. It has also been used for rights that may not actually be enforceable at English law, but which demonstrate a genuine interest, such as the complainant's own name (see DRS 00693 tahirmohsan.co.uk).

When do I have to have the rights?

At the time of the complaint, according to the appeal panel in DRS 03078 ghd.co.uk. Note that the DRS looks to see if a domain name was abusive at the time it was registered or at any later time. While it may be enough to have rights at the time of the complaint in order to make the complaint, you may not be able to show that the registration was abusive if you did not have rights at the time the abuse took place.

For example, it is unlikely that a domain name registration was made in order to prevent you having it if you set up business two years ago and the domain name was registered four years ago.

As a respondent, what do I have to do about rights?

Directly, nothing. You do not necessarily need rights in the name to have it. However, if you do have rights, it is more likely that what you are doing with the domain name is not abusive, which is relevant for the second test. So, if you do have rights, say so. Also, in your response you should highlight any problems with the Complainant's rights (for example, if they did not have them at the right time).