- Hayden Adams recounts how the OG owners of Uniswap.com wanted seven figures, but “we” refused to pay.
- SBF bought the domain for seven figures and pointed it to a Uniswap fork, which Adams says was likely to “flex.”
- This raises a key question about how Uniswap Labs ultimately won control of the domain without buying it back.
The revelation that Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) allegedly purchased Uniswap.com for a seven-figure sum to target Uniswap has revived attention on one of cryptos most unusual domain disputes.
The key question is how Uniswap Labs ultimately won control of the domain without buying it back after SBF redirected it to a Uniswap fork.
According to Uniswap protocol inventor Hayden Adams, SBF purchased Uniswap.com after Uniswap Labs declined to meet the original owners seven-figure asking price. In a post on X, Adams has stated, “the og owners of Uniswap.com wanted 7 figures, but we refused to pay that amount.”
Meanwhile, SBF reportedly purchased the Uniswap.com domain name to redirect users away from the official Uniswap platform and toward a competing clone or “fork” project. In May 2021, when Uniswap Labs filed its WIPO complaint, uniswap.com redirected visitors to a SushiSwap subpage. Adams said that SBF directed the domain to a Uniswap fork and gave his own assessment of the motive: “I guess to flex/mess with us.”
When the uniswap.com domain was purchased and redirected toward its rival SushiSwap, it sparked a major corporate crypto drama that highlights the crucial intersection of web traffic and traditional intellectual property law in decentralized finance (DeFi). Because Uniswap natively hosts its decentralized application under a .org address (uniswap.org), many retail traders naturally typed in the .com variation first, causing them to be siphoned directly to a competitors interface.
Discover more
Crypto exchange comparison
Blockchain consulting services
Bitcoin mining hardware
The redirect provided Uniswap Labs a strong legal lever in the context of the conventional trademark and domain dispute rules. Using the domain to redirect traffic to a direct commercial competitor supported a finding of bad faith and marketplace confusion.
Uniswap Labs recovered uniswap.com through the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), rather than purchasing it from the then-owner. The process facilitated a legally binding way to challenge the registration and led to a transfer order rather than a negotiated sale between the disputing parties.
On May 18, 2021, Universal Navigation Inc., operating as Uniswap Labs, filed a complaint with WIPO under Case No. D2021-1556 against the then-registrant. The respondent had registered the domain on April 7th, 2021. Upon registrar verification, an amended complaint, response and additional filings, WIPO established a three-member administrative panel to determine the case.
Furthermore, the panel issued its ruling on September 3, 2021, and ordered uniswap.com to be transferred to Uniswap Labs. The ruling thus gave Uniswap Labs control of the domain without any sale.
Related: Fake Uniswap Google Ads Drain Over $400K From Crypto Users
What Does the Uniswap.com Case Mean for Trademark Rights and Domain Ownership in Crypto？
The Uniswap.com case shows that trademark rights can override domain ownership in crypto when a domain is used in bad faith. The UDRP does not require that a project register the domain first. Panels evaluate whether the domain matches a trademark, if the registrant has any legitimate interests and if the domain causes user confusion.
A crypto project may thus lose control over a valuable domain, even if the domain was initially registered by someone else. Uniswap.com had existed since 2000, prior to the launch of Uniswap, and Uniswap Labs subsequently acquired trademark rights. The respondents acquisition and redirecting the domain to SushiSwap justified a transfer order without any purchase by Uniswap Labs.
Related: Scammers Steal Over $400,000 Via Fake Uniswap Google Ads
Crypto firms should register important domains early, obtain trademark protection and track domain ownership changes and redirects. Investors should verify websites through official project sources and watch for suspicious redirects, unfamiliar interfaces, requests for seed phrases or private keys, and sudden domain changes. These are some of the indicators to watch for impersonation, phishing or user diversion.