In the digital age, domain names have become vital tools for identifying and accessing internet resources. However, disputes arising from abuses such as cybersquatting and typosquatting have created significant legal challenges. The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), established by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), was designed as an efficient framework for addressing such disputes. This policy is founded on three primary criteria: the domain name being confusingly similar to a trademark, the domain holder lacking a legitimate right or interest, and the domain being registered and used in bad faith. An analysis of key WIPO cases reveals that the arbitration practice in this area seeks to strike a balance between protecting intellectual property rights and preventing online abuses. These decisions highlight the importance of trademark fame and its role in establishing bad faith. Despite the advantages of the UDRP, such as speed and low cost, challenges persist, including the difficulty of proving bad faith and the limitations of non‑in-person proceedings. Refining the guidelines for assessing bad faith and increasing transparency in the arbitration process could strengthen this system. Ultimately, as an effective mechanism for resolving domain name disputes, the UDRP plays a key role in safeguarding intellectual property rights in the digital space.