Registering a domain that stitches together two famous brands isn’t a clever bet on the future — it’s cybersquatting. The jiohotstar.com saga is, at heart, a simple case of theft dressed up as opportunity.
What happened
A Delhi individual, unaffiliated with either company, registered jiohotstar.com roughly a year before the Jio–Hotstar merger became public, foreseeing the tie-up. Much of the online debate framed it as “big corporation versus individual” — with sympathy for the person who “got there first.”
But the framing is wrong. Unauthorised use of well-known trademarks — even inside a domain name — amounts to cybersquatting, trademark infringement and passing off. Granting such requests would only invite a wave of copycat registrations.
The UDRP three-part test
The dispute falls to be decided under the UDRP (Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy). To win a transfer, a complainant must establish all three elements:
- Para 4(a)(i): the domain is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which the complainant has rights.
- Para 4(a)(ii): the registrant has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain.
- Para 4(a)(iii): the domain was registered and is being used in bad faith.
Here, the domain combines two well-recognised marks; the registrant had no genuine intention to use it; and he publicly declared an intent to extract money — squarely bad faith.
Why it’s theft, not PR
Treating this as a corporate PR problem misses the point. However sympathetically framed, appropriating someone’s brand is unlawful. The registrant here is neither an innocent domain squatter nor, so far as is known, a habitual one — but conceding to him would still harm the rights holders and reward the tactic.
A stubborn myth persists that registering a domain containing a registered trademark is a harmless free-for-all. Courts have consistently held otherwise: a domain is an extension of a business’s identity, like a storefront or logo. Bad-faith registrations — acquiring a domain to resell it to the brand owner or to trade off its recognition — are the textbook wrong the UDRP exists to prevent. As intermediary liability tightens, enforcement against squatters is only getting stronger.
The takeaways
- A domain built from a famous mark is not “first come, first served.” It is cybersquatting, and the law treats it as infringement.
- Bad faith sinks the registration. Registering to resell, or to trade on brand recognition, satisfies the UDRP’s third element.
- Brand owners have a fast route. The UDRP delivers a transfer without full litigation where all three elements are met.
Frequently asked questions
Is registering a domain with someone’s brand name illegal? Using a well-known trademark in a domain without authorisation can amount to cybersquatting, trademark infringement and passing off — even if you never build a website on it.
What does a brand owner have to prove under the UDRP? All three elements: the domain is identical or confusingly similar to their mark, the registrant has no legitimate interest, and it was registered and used in bad faith.
Does registering a domain before a merger give you rights to it? No. Foreseeing a merger and grabbing the domain to profit is evidence of bad faith, not a legitimate interest.
Is offering to sell the domain to the brand owner bad faith? Typically yes — acquiring a domain primarily to sell it to the trademark owner is a classic bad-faith indicator under the UDRP.