In a corporate transaction domain names are often bundled together with trademark rights; initially during due diligence and later when drafting trademark assignments. Many businesses (but not all) incorporate their trademarks into their domain names. For example the brand Nike has trademarks in the word Nike. As Nike is distinctive and not descriptive it is capable of being registered as a trademark. Nike also uses the domain nike.com to market its goods and as such any 3rd party using Nike risk infringing the trademark rights of Nike. This is different to a domain such as hotels.com. Hotel is descriptive and not capable of being registered as a trademark. Allowing such a registration would prevent all hotels describing themselves as such. Some domain names incorporate words which are trade marks and some domain names do not. The point is that the domain name itself is not the intellectual property right.
What is a domain name?
A domain name on its own does not attach to any tangible thing; it is not fixed. It is a string of characters which directs a user to a particular area of space sitting on a server which may or may not contain further information. This server space (which is ring-fenced by paying an appropriate fee) may be occupied by digital works of copyright. The most well-known is works of copyright in website content (e.g. text, pictures, graphics and videos) and to a lesser known extent, copyright in software code. This code sits behind the website and allows the website to operate as it should (think interfaces and operating systems). This interoperability can be illustrated by the issues web users experienced when internet use transitioned to smart phone use. Many websites designed to operate from a desk-top PC no longer worked properly and such websites had to be modified to allow browsing via smartphone technology. Again, the point here is that works of copyright subsist in the code and website content and not the domain name itself.
Domains are transient; they can be used to direct users to any space on the web which, if used correctly directs you to relevant information. In reality the information (if any) may or may not be connected to the string of characters. The individual with technical rights is able to configure the space where the domain sits to direct users to the most appropriate web space: a common practice employed by owners of multiple similar domains where a user typing in 100 domains will redirect them to a single domain, often a generic top-level domains (gTLD) or .com domain. Commercially, you would want your customer users to land at relevant content but phishing practices, worms and viruses pose significant cybersecurity risks to the business. These practices can result in customers revealing personal and financial information to 3rd parties who use the information fraudulently. If your customers or potential customers are victims of such cybercrimes they will have little trust in your business and you will most likely suffer adverse publicity. A cyberattack which divulges personal data and which has been made possible due to inadequate security measures will not only harm your reputation but may also land you with a penalty from the Information Commissioner as well as you being subject to claims from individuals whose personal data has been obtained.
Why is a domain name not an intellectual property right?
An intellectual property right is an intangible right which attaches to its tangible expression. As an intangible right, the benefit of ownership is that its owner has a right of enforcement. This enforcement right is one which is not necessarily subject to taking physical possession. Delivery up of tangible expressions of intellectual property rights illustrates enforcement by taking physical possession in an intellectual property context.
If a domain name is an intellectual property right then it can only be an intangible asset, the expression of which can only be the words or string of characters which may or may not direct a user to that particular server space containing further information. This string of characters often, but not always, fails to attract rights in itself as it fails to meet the requirements of being unique and distinctive; essential for trademark registration. The most valuable domain names in industry are not trademarks. They are those not capable of trademark registration for lack of distinctiveness and being descriptive of the good or service to which it is trying to attach.
There is no dispute that there is inherent value in some domains which are devoid of distinctive character for trademark purposes and require no creative skill or effort. Excellent examples include domains such as hotels.com and insurance.com. The value of these domains is not in the domain itself but rather in the aggregation of information and data which sits within these domains.
So, if it’s not an IP right is it a tangible property right?
The right of enforcement of tangible property is possession. If a domain name is a tangible property right then legal assignment (transfer) must be by taking possession. Further, to legally assign a tangible property right the assignment must be absolute or unconditional. A domain name owner does not have this absolute right and title to give. There is no legal basis to bring a claim against a bona fide domain name owner (other than for trademark infringement). Its entitlement is subject to the terms of the registration agreement with the domain name registrant which is ultimately controlled by the ICANN. It is therefore not a tangible property right either.
Whilst many bundle domain name registrations along with trademarks or other intellectual property rights, unless there are adequate contractual provisions to effect transfer, there is no legal basis which a purchaser of a domain name could enforce its rights against the original party.
Remedying deficiencies for which to bring a claim
The owner of a domain name is the person or entity listed as being authorised to make or request changes to be made in certain information related to a domain name. It is crucial to not only know who the registrant is but also who has administrative, billing and technical rights related to any given domain. Any purported transfer of a domain name from one registrant to another should be by written contract, the terms of which address each of the aforementioned rights which if the original registrant fails to fulfil its contractual obligations gives the incoming registrant the right to claim for breach of contract.
What your contract should include
Where a transaction does not involve the transfer of valuable intellectual property rights, it is not necessary to draft additional documentation for the transfer of domain names. You do not need an assignment. It is adequate to include the necessary provisions in the transaction documentation.
Similarly, if a transaction does involve transferring valuable intellectual property rights, domain name transfer obligations can be included within the IP assignment documentation or the transaction documentation but corporate and IP teams need to be clear between them as to where it is being addressed.
As a purchaser, you will want to ensure there is a clear contractual right to access and control the domain names. This can form part of the completion deliverables and includes:
- providing online domain name account details and passwords;
- completing the relevant change of registrant details including administrative, technical and other contacts as necessary as well as changing any webhost; and
- providing evidence of having effected the change by way of email confirmation or notification to or from the domain name registrar.
A purchaser will also want to receive the benefit of certain warranties which will again strengthen the contractual basis for which you may bring a claim should the seller fail to affect the transfer. These warranties are that:
- the seller is the current registered owner and has the right, power and authority to transfer the domain name;
- the domain is free from any 3rd party rights and that it has not been the subject to challenge or contested by any 3rd party;
- the seller has not committed any breaches under the registration agreement;
- all formalities including renewals have been complied with; and
- the owner does not use any part of the domain name as a trademark (registered or unregistered) post-transaction.
You may be interested in...
In Person Event
'Autonomous vehicles: what the future holds' event
Legal Update
MiCA: The Comprehensive Crypto Regulation Set to revolutionise the EU
Opinion
Practical points from High Court ruling that Tesco has infringed Lidl’s IP rights in its famous yellow circle logo
Opinion
Mediation – remote or in person?
Legal Update
Knowledge exchange and intellectual property
Legal Update
Government to expand network and Information systems regulations
Opinion
The UK market offers the best value for commercial real estate
Legal Update
Product distribution – how to protect yourself from an early exit
Online Event
Register your interest to join our next Home Delivery Academy
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s intellectual property lawyers ranked experts in World Trademark Review guide 2023
Legal Update
Government publishes its proposals for expanding the Scope of the Network and Information Systems Regulations 2018
Published Article
Reaching cloud nine? Public procurement for cloud-based services
Published Article
Consumer duty part 3 - 'The drill-down' into the 'cross-cutting' rules
On-Demand
Automotive webinar - EV charging points: contractual and liability issues to be aware of
On-Demand
Automotive webinar - Grant Funding and Collaboration Agreements
In this session, we examined the legal framework around grant funded collaborations and discussed the key risks to be aware of, including IP ownership and compliance with grant terms.
On-Demand
Automotive webinar - Commercial Contracts
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advises sustainable waste solution provider Covanta Europe on its new Wellingborough based aggregate processing plant
Press Release - #BeingBrowneJacobson
From associate to partner in an investment lifecycle - Ryan's story
Press Release
International leading digital disruption expert joins Browne Jacobson
Press Release - #BeingBrowneJacobson
Browne Jacobson helps the Civil Aviation Authority take off with its modernisation masterplan
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s retail lawyers advise Wilko on its strategic £48m sale and leaseback of Nottinghamshire distribution centre to DHL
National law firm Browne Jacobson has advised long standing retail client, Wilko on the sale and leaseback of its Nottinghamshire distribution centre in Worksop to logistics specialist DHL for £48m.
Press Release
Court of Appeal makes plea for legally enforceable arbitration for FRAND disputes
In the ongoing complex litigation between Optis Cellular Technology LLC and Apple Inc., the Court of Appeal ([2022] EWCA Civ 1411) has upheld the High Court’s findings that implementers of standard-essential patents (SEPs) cannot refuse to accept a FRAND license and continue activities in the meantime which constitute infringement: that party must commit to accept a court-determined license if it wishes to avoid an injunction.
Published Article
AI generated designs on retail products
Every AI will have its own terms of use. DALL·E 2’s Terms of Use dated 3 November 2022 specify that as between a user and Open AI, a user owns their prompts and uploads. Open AI also assigns to the user all rights in any images generated by DALL·E 2 for that user (subject to the user complying with those Terms of Use, and to a licence to use inputs and output to develop and improve the services).
Published Article
Bruce Willis AI and the problem with deepfakes
A deepfake of Bruce Willis is advertising Russian mobile phones. Many great artistic and metaphysical questions are raised by this performance. However, this article is going to look at the intellectual property law implications, from a UK perspective.
Legal Update
Trigger happy when directors’ duties are the target?
In a judgment handed down yesterday the Supreme Court has affirmed that a so called “creditor duty” exists for directors such that in some circumstances company directors are required to act in accordance with, or to consider the interests of creditors. Those circumstances potentially arise when a company is insolvent or where there is a “probability” of an insolvency. We explore below the “trigger” for such a test to apply and its implications.
Legal Update
The Retained EU Law
Created at the end of the Brexit transition period, Retained EU Law is a category of domestic law that consists of EU-derived legislation retained in our domestic legal framework by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. This was never intended to be a permanent arrangement as parliament promised to deal with retained EU law through the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (the “Bill”).
Opinion
Sequana: Supreme clarification on the duty owed to creditors
The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed the BTI v Sequana appeal and reviewed the existence, content and engagement of the so-called ‘creditor duty’; being the point at which the interest of creditors is said to intrude upon the decision-making of directors of companies in financial distress.
Opinion
IR35 rules to be scrapped from April 2023
Published Article
The problematic transition to electric vehicles - what is the impact on manufacturing
It was reported in May 2022 that the BMW-owned manufacturer had been forced to put a temporary stop on the production of all manual transmission vehicles due to the global semi-conductor shortage and the war in Ukraine. Mini stated that the move was made in order to "ensure production stability".
Press Release - Careers
Browne Jacobson strengthens its UK&I commercial practice with hire of new retail & consumer specialist partner
Browne Jacobson has bolstered its commercial practice in the UK with the appointment of commercial contracts and international trade specialist, Emma Roake, into its City-based London team.
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s Private Equity specialists advise Palatine on key CTS exit
Browne Jacobson’s national private equity (PE) lawyers have advised leading mid-market PE investment firm, Palatine Private Equity (Palatine) on its exit from CTS Group, the fast-growing specialist in testing, inspection and geoengineering consulting services to the construction and infrastructure sectors.
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s specialist corporate finance lawyers advise LDC on sale of global IT services provider
Browne Jacobson’s corporate finance lawyers have advised leading mid-market private equity firm, LDC and management on the sale of specialist managed IT services provider, Littlefish to Bowmark Capital.
Legal Update
Digital Markets Act and Data Platforms - FRANDs for life?
The Digital Markets Act (the “DMA”) joins the dots between competition law and data protection law and actively targets data-driven platforms. It is also a comprehensive regulation to take note of, with familiar GDPR-style fines tied to turnover.
Opinion
Cameras in convenience stores: a potential hornet’s nest..?
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advise CTS Group on acquisition of In Situ testing specialists
Browne Jacobson’s private equity (PE) dealmakers have advised Palatine Private Equity backed CTS Group (Construction Testing Solutions Limited) on its acquisition of In Situ Site Investigation, a market leader in Cone Penetration Testing and Pressuremeter techniques and ground investigation services.
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advise Rcapital on acquisition of two managing general agents by insurance investment specialist, Primary Group
Browne Jacobson’s corporate finance lawyers have advised leading private equity investor, Rcapital Partners LLP (Rcapital) on its majority stake acquisition of managing general agents (MGAs), UK General Insurance Ltd (UKG) and Precision Partnership Limited (PPL) alongside Montague Investment Group LLP who are taking a minority stake.
Published Article
Sole director decisions Another perspective
In an unreported case (Re Active Wear Limited (in Administration)), the High Court has ruled that an out-of-court administration appointment, instigated by a sole director of a company with unmodified model articles, was valid notwithstanding the earlier decision of Deputy Judge Farnhill (also in the High Court) in the case Hashmi v Lorimer-Wing (also known as Re Fore Fitness Investments Holdings Ltd) [2022] EWHC 191 (Ch) (02 February 2022).
Legal Update
Merger and Acquisition trends in the specialist lending market
Published Article
Rolls Royce SMR ambitions will bring Hinkley like benefits to regions
Rolls-Royce has shortlisted six locations for its first factory for small nuclear power stations. We look at the impact on regions & local businesses
Legal Update
Banking Transaction Update July 2022 - North West transactions
There are clearly challenging macro-economic factors at play but at Browne Jacobson we continue to see good levels of transactional activity with certain sectors being particularly buoyant: healthcare, financial services, energy & infrastructure and tech.