LevelUp.gg Domain Dispute: Panel Rules Attempt to Reverse Hijack

In a recent ruling, a panelist has determined that a cybersquatting dispute concerning the domain name LevelUp.gg was, in fact, an attempt at reverse domain name hijacking. The case, brought forth by video game consultancy Level Up Management BV, has been dismissed, highlighting the complexities and potential pitfalls in domain name disputes.

The adjudicator’s detailed finding (PDF) reveals that Level Up Management BV sought to improperly acquire the LevelUp.gg domain. This case marks only the sixth cybersquatting dispute for .gg domains under the Channel Islands Dispute Resolution Service Policy, underscoring the relatively infrequent but significant nature of such legal battles.

The .gg domain extension has gained considerable popularity among gaming companies, aligning with the ubiquitous gaming term “level up.” This association makes domains like LevelUp.gg particularly valuable and attractive to businesses in the gaming sector.

A Thorough Examination of the Dispute

Panelist Nick Lockett authored an exceptionally comprehensive decision, delving into the history of the .gg domain within the gaming industry and tracing the origins of the shorthand “GG,” a common abbreviation for “Good Game.” His meticulous analysis provides valuable context for understanding the significance of the domain name in question.

Level Up Management BV, operating under the domain name LevelUpAgency.eu, initially attempted to purchase LevelUp.gg upon its expiration. However, domain investor Steven Hartley of Media Name successfully acquired the domain. Subsequently, Mats Adams, representing Level Up Management BV, initiated negotiations to buy the domain from Hartley. These discussions proved unfruitful, with Adams offering a mere $300 while Hartley maintained a minimum asking price of $5,000.

In a follow-up communication, Hartley inquired about Adams’ continued interest in the domain. Adams responded with the following:

There is but I’m not willing to go much higher from my last offer, and if you want thousands of dollars for a domain name like this, that won’t come from me.

It’s not that important for me.

If you’re willing to come to an acceptable agreement, then I will take it of (sic) your hands, if not so be it.

Notably, Adams omitted this particular communication from his formal complaint, only mentioning Hartley’s attempts to sell the domain to him. This omission proved to be a critical factor in the panelist’s decision.

The Significance of Omission

Addressing this critical omission, Lockett stated:

“Yet, the complaint alluded to price negotiations but then failed to disclose this critical response. This failure to be entirely candid was one factor that tipped the balance into the conclusion I came to on [reverse domain name hijacking].”

Lockett emphasized that Adams’ lack of transparency regarding the negotiation process significantly influenced his determination of reverse domain name hijacking.

Furthermore, the panelist found it peculiar that Adams altered his social media handles to include “gg” at the end after the initial complaint was filed. This raised further questions about the legitimacy of his claims.

Initially, Adams’ complaint referenced the Twitter handle @levelupeu. However, the .gg registry deemed the complaint inadequate and provided Adams with a template. He subsequently filed a second complaint, this time referencing Twitter and LinkedIn handles associated with levelupgg.

Questionable Justifications

The panelist also challenged Adams’ assertion that he chose the domain leveupagency.eu solely because LevelUp.gg was already registered at the time.

If there were any credibility to Mats Adams’ assertion that levelupagency.eu was only registered because levelup.gg was registered at the time, then as both levelupagency.gg and levelupgg.com were both available for registration, the Adjudicator takes the view that one or both of these would have been registered (levelupgg.com being registered on 27 th April 2019 and levelupagency.gg never having been registered). It is noted that no complaint or domain dispute proceedings have been issued by the Complainant against this levelupgg.com domain by the Complainant.

Lockett reasoned that if Adams’ claim held merit, he would have registered either levelupagency.gg or levelupgg.com, both of which were available. The fact that he did not pursue these options further undermined his argument.

Complaint Denied: Reverse Domain Name Hijacking Found

Ultimately, Lockett denied the complaint and concluded that Level Up Management BV had engaged in reverse domain name hijacking. This decision serves as a warning against those who attempt to unfairly acquire domain names through deceptive or misleading means.

Ankur Raheja of CyLaw Solutions represented Steven Hartley in this case. His expertise in domain name law proved instrumental in defending against the reverse domain name hijacking attempt.

Understanding Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) is a serious issue in the world of domain name disputes. It occurs when a trademark holder or another entity attempts to improperly obtain a domain name from a legitimate owner, often by misusing or abusing the legal procedures established to protect trademark rights. This can involve making false claims of cybersquatting or other forms of infringement.

The consequences of being found guilty of RDNH can be significant, including financial penalties and damage to reputation. It’s crucial for companies and individuals to act ethically and responsibly when pursuing domain name disputes.

Key Takeaways from the LevelUp.gg Case

The LevelUp.gg case provides several important lessons for domain name owners and those involved in domain disputes:

• Transparency is paramount: Full and honest disclosure of all relevant communications and facts is essential in domain name disputes.
• Consider all available options: Before initiating a dispute, explore all available alternatives, such as purchasing the domain directly from the owner or registering a different domain name.
• Seek legal counsel: Domain name law can be complex. It’s advisable to seek legal advice from an attorney experienced in domain name disputes.
• Understand the burden of proof: The party bringing the complaint bears the burden of proving their case.
• Be prepared for scrutiny: Domain name disputes are subject to scrutiny by panelists and the public.

This case highlights the importance of fair and ethical conduct in the domain name ecosystem. It also demonstrates the effectiveness of dispute resolution mechanisms in protecting the rights of legitimate domain name owners.

The Growing Importance of Gaming Domains

As the gaming industry continues to expand, the value of relevant domain names, such as those using the .gg extension, will only increase. Companies seeking to establish a strong online presence in the gaming world should carefully consider their domain name strategy and ensure that they are acting in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.

The LevelUp.gg case serves as a reminder that domain name disputes are not always straightforward and that it’s crucial to approach them with integrity and a thorough understanding of the legal landscape.