Avoiding mistakes in the Trademark Clearinghouse

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Avoiding mistakes in the Trademark Clearinghouse

The impending rollout of new gTLDs has concerned rights owners, but yesterday's panel at INTA's Annual Meeting, New gTLDs: Brand Strategies in Cyberspace, gave tips on how to use the Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) and the Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) system to help protect marks online.

The TMCH is a central database that allows brand owners to register their marks. Once ownership of the mark is verified, the TMCH will alert the brand owner when someone is registering a matching domain name. The party applying for that domain name is also notified that its application corresponds with a verified mark in the TMCH database.

The TMCH is just one layer of protection for brand owners. "The Clearinghouse is meant to support what's now the mandatory sunrise period," explained Amy Stathos of ICANN. The sunrise period gives trademark owners an advance opportunity to register domain names matching their marks ahead of the general public.

While the system is a useful tool for brand owners, some have had difficulties navigating the new system. Vicky Folens from Deloitte explained some of the common mistakes users are making. (Deloitte is the verification services provider for the TMCH.)

The most common error comes when users are creating their account, explained Folens. New users must register as either a trademark agent or a trademark owner. She noted that many trademark holders are accidentally registering as an agent, which requires a US$15,000 deposit.

Another common mistake is leaving out non-standard characters, such as accents on letters and the German double S, from their marks. Folens noted that this is likely because previous sunrise periods allowed for omission of these marks, while the TMCH requires their inclusion.

She also pointed out that when registering marks in the TMCH, brand owners are not filling in the field for a description of the goods and services, and instead stating "see trademark certificate." The problem with this, Folens explained, is that when a notice is sent to the party applying for a domain that triggers the TMCH alert, it will then not receive the required descriptive information.

Finally, she clarified that only registered marks and common law marks subjected to a court decision may be registered with the TMCH. Pending registrations, as well as common law marks that have not been subject to litigation, may not be registered in the Clearinghouse.

Panelist John Berryhill of Pennsylvania had one humorous bit of advice for rights owners: If you have a common law trademark that hasn't been subject to a court case, go sue someone now.

For clear-cut cases

Brand owners can also take advantage of the new URS system for gTLD disputes, which is designed to complement the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP).

The URS system is based on the UDRP, though it is designed to be faster and less expensive, explained Kristine Dorrain of the National Arbitration Forum. A decision can be made in as few as 20 days, and most will be handled within 30. Fees can also be as low as US$375. The system will allow for appeals, handled within the URS or to the UDRP.

In order to maintain the speed and low costs, Dorrain said that the system is only intended for "clear-cut cases of cybersquatting." The complainant is limited to listing its claims via check-boxes, and must limit its written statement to 500 words.

So if a brand owner has to submit substantial evidence and argument, the URS might not be the best tool for that claim, said Dorrain.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Evan Lazerowitz, attorney in Robinson + Cole’s bankruptcy and reorganisation group, offers key takeaways for IP interested parties in bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings
While the UK sees heavy IP rankings movement, Germany’s new tiered UPC table signals a shift from early adoption to market maturity
In an exclusive interview, Bernard Ledeboer reveals how a Consolid-backed group of firms wants to expand across Europe, invest in AI and centralise operations to compete at the top tier
Not all private equity firms are the same, so leaders at four externally backed IP firms came together to discuss the frameworks they followed and how they ensured a cultural fit
Top-tier German and Spanish firms are among the advisers on a Europe-wide copyright and licensing tussle concerning the design of the track circuit in Madrid
Partners Alex Wilson and Andreas Kramer say bigger law firm rivals don’t necessarily gain by having a wider jurisdictional reach
VO, which has offices in the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany, is the second European IP firm to secure external backing this week
The Bardehle Pagenberg attorneys-at-law discuss the firm’s Managing IP EMEA Awards 2026 success, Unified Patent Court litigation strategy, and evolving European patent trends
A patent battle between two legal tech companies and a loss for Elon Musk’s xAI against OpenAI were also among the top talking points
With drug prices a hot topic in the US, courts are seemingly more reluctant to prevent the entry of generics to the market
Gift this article