Rocket Lab USA, Inc. has been found guilty of reverse domain name hijacking.



The company, which launches satellites, filed a cybersquatting complaint against rocketlab.com, owned by RocketLab Inc. However, RocketLab Inc. had registered the domain name before the existence of Rocket Lab USA, rendering the case baseless. It was impossible to prove that the domain was registered with the intention of targeting the Complainant.

The UDRP panel concluded that this case was a clear instance of reverse domain name hijacking due to several reasons. Firstly, the Complainant, represented by a lawyer, should have realized the futility of their case given that the rocketlab.com domain name was registered years before the Complainant acquired trademark rights in the ROCKET LAB mark. Secondly, the argument that Respondent's failure to use the domain name for an active website amounts to bad faith is weak, as there is no evidence that the Respondent ever targeted the Complainant.

Thirdly, the use of the domain name for email correspondence qualifies as using it in connection with bona fide offering of goods or services. Lastly, it is apparent that the Complaint was filed as a "Plan B" after the Complainant failed to acquire the disputed domain name from Respondent.

In the case mentioned, the domain name rocketlab.com was registered by RocketLab Inc. before Rocket Lab USA, Inc. came into existence. This means that the domain name was already in use and owned by RocketLab Inc. prior to any trademark rights or establishment of Rocket Lab USA, Inc.

The fact that the domain name was registered prior to the existence of the complaining company is an essential factor in determining the validity of the cybersquatting complaint. In such cases, it becomes incredibly difficult to prove that the domain was registered with the intention of targeting the complaining party.

In this particular case, the UDRP panel found that the complainant, Rocket Lab USA, Inc., should have realized the futility of their case given that RocketLab Inc. had registered the domain name years prior to the complainant acquiring trademark rights. This suggests that the complainant's case lacked a strong legal basis or evidence to support their claim of cybersquatting.

It is important to note that registering a domain name before another party establishes their company or acquires trademark rights does not automatically constitute cybersquatting. The UDRP panel considered several factors, including the timing of the domain registration and the lack of evidence indicating any bad faith or intentional targeting of the complainant.


Domain name speculation involves acquiring domain names that are related to popular or emerging industries, products, or brands. The speculator hopes to sell the domain to the relevant company for a profit once they establish themselves or become well-known. However, it's worth noting that this practice can be controversial and raise legal issues.

On the other hand, sometimes a domain name may have been registered long before a company emerged simply due to coincidence. It's possible that the domain name owner had no prior knowledge of the future company's existence and registered the domain for personal or unrelated reasons.

In some cases, the owner of a domain name may approach a company after its establishment and offer to sell the domain at a higher price. This negotiation process can vary depending on the parties involved and their willingness to reach an agreement.

Overall, the registration of a domain name long before a company existed can be seen as a unique situation that carries both strategic and coincidental elements.