Hacker Group Files UDRP Complaint Against Itself in Clever Attempt to Take Ownership of Valuable Domain

Sep 11

We were recently contacted by a local company in Atlanta unwillingly involved in a Uniform Domain Resolution Procedure (UDRP) proceeding before the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The local company owned a valuable two-letter domain (e.g., ab.com) that had been appraised for seven figures. The domain had been in use since the late 1990s, and the domain is still used in connection with software and software services today.

A hacker group contacted the domain owner, claiming they had attempted to hack the domain while demanding a ransom ($20,000 in cryptocurrency) to return control. The domain owner, a sophisticated software developer, verified no such breach had occurred and chose not to comply with the ransom demand, all while retaining control of the domain. The hacker group clearly realized the value of the two-letter domain.

In a bold attempt to usurp the domain, the hacker group filed a UDRP complaint before WIPO, listing itself as Respondent and attaching their own extortion emails as exhibits. They argued that the hacker group had taken possession of the domain, and requested WIPO to retransfer ownership. Remarkably, the hacker group even paid the $1,500 filing fee and submitted a complaint compliant with the UDRP rules in which they listed the actual domain owner as the complainant. The hacker group’s deception included using correct names and details, but they included a fraudulent email address, which they controlled, as the email address of the domain owner to mislead WIPO. As a result, WIPO directed communications to the hacker group as the complainant, instead of the actual domain owner. Fortunately, the complaint was riddled with spelling errors, and the cited trademark was owned by a third-party unrelated to the domain owner.

Presumably, the hacker group either hoped to extort the cryptocurrency ransom as a settlement or hoped that a default judgment would occur whereby WIPO would provide domain transfer instructions to the hacker group, rather than the lawful domain owner. In other words, the hacker group’s scheme hinged on the assumption that without intervention, WIPO might issue a default judgment, unknowingly transferring the domain to the hackers. Recognizing the potential threat, our team assisted the domain owner of informing WIPO of the fraud.

Curiously, when denying the complaint, WIPO did not take up the issue of whether the complaint was fraudulently filed. They did, however, note that “the record indicates that the Complainant is a fraudster.” As WIPO did not take up the fraudulent complaint as a central issue, it instead indicated that there was no trademark on which to ground a UDRP complaint even if the Complainant were a proper party, punting the complaint on a procedural issue (potentially a cause for concern as the domain owner indeed has a valid trademark).

This case underscores the extreme lengths to which hacker groups will go to unlawfully obtain valuable assets. It’s a clear example of the innovative and aggressive strategies hackers employ to exploit domain disputes.

Thanks to the intervention, WIPO denied the complaint, and the domain owner retained ownership of its prized domain. Again, this case highlights the creativity and persistence of hacker groups in their attempts to control high-value domains, even investing in UDRP filing fees to further their schemes.

About PKH. PKH is an Atlanta-based law firm specializing in intellectual property law. With a team of dedicated attorneys, the firm provides comprehensive legal services in patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret matters. PKH is committed to delivering innovative and strategic solutions to protect and enforce its clients' intellectual property rights.