


Slipknot Fights to Reclaim Slipknot.com from Alleged Cybersquatter
The third party has controlled the domain since 2001
Heavy metal band Slipknot is suing the alleged cybersquatter who registered the slipknot.com domain in 2001. The band alleges the anonymous party is using it in bad faith, violating US cybersquatting laws and infringing their trademarks.
The details:
The unknown third party registered slipknot.com on 5 February 2001, forcing the band to use slipknot1.com.
In its lawsuit, Slipknot states their logo was first registered with the US trademark registry in 2002, with the band beginning the process in 1999.
As part of that process, it claims a ‘first use’ date of 4 April 1996.
The band argues that when the unknown party registered slipknot.com in 2001, its name was already famous and the group was in the process of registering its logo.
As a result, it claims, the registration of slipknot.com was intended to profit off the band’s brand.
Cybersquatting:
As per Complete Music Update, owning a trademark in a specific name doesn’t give the owner the right to own that name “in the context of an internet domain.”
However, the US Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act can offer protection to a trademark owner if it’s proved that a “third party registered and operates a domain that features the trademark in bad faith.”
slipknot.com currently contains buttons linking off to ticketing websites and unofficial Slipknot merch.
The band claims that the owner of the domain earns money from the operators of the linked sites.
The owner is, the band states, facilitating “the sale of unauthorized and counterfeit Slipknot goods by third-party websites.”
The lawsuit alleges the owner is violating the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act by “using a domain name that is identical to the Slipknot mark with a bad faith to profit therefrom.”
The ask:
Slipknot is seeking a court order transferring ownership of slipknot.com to the band.
It is also suing for trademark infringement and unfair competition.
Heavy metal band Slipknot is suing the alleged cybersquatter who registered the slipknot.com domain in 2001. The band alleges the anonymous party is using it in bad faith, violating US cybersquatting laws and infringing their trademarks.
The details:
The unknown third party registered slipknot.com on 5 February 2001, forcing the band to use slipknot1.com.
In its lawsuit, Slipknot states their logo was first registered with the US trademark registry in 2002, with the band beginning the process in 1999.
As part of that process, it claims a ‘first use’ date of 4 April 1996.
The band argues that when the unknown party registered slipknot.com in 2001, its name was already famous and the group was in the process of registering its logo.
As a result, it claims, the registration of slipknot.com was intended to profit off the band’s brand.
Cybersquatting:
As per Complete Music Update, owning a trademark in a specific name doesn’t give the owner the right to own that name “in the context of an internet domain.”
However, the US Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act can offer protection to a trademark owner if it’s proved that a “third party registered and operates a domain that features the trademark in bad faith.”
slipknot.com currently contains buttons linking off to ticketing websites and unofficial Slipknot merch.
The band claims that the owner of the domain earns money from the operators of the linked sites.
The owner is, the band states, facilitating “the sale of unauthorized and counterfeit Slipknot goods by third-party websites.”
The lawsuit alleges the owner is violating the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act by “using a domain name that is identical to the Slipknot mark with a bad faith to profit therefrom.”
The ask:
Slipknot is seeking a court order transferring ownership of slipknot.com to the band.
It is also suing for trademark infringement and unfair competition.
Heavy metal band Slipknot is suing the alleged cybersquatter who registered the slipknot.com domain in 2001. The band alleges the anonymous party is using it in bad faith, violating US cybersquatting laws and infringing their trademarks.
The details:
The unknown third party registered slipknot.com on 5 February 2001, forcing the band to use slipknot1.com.
In its lawsuit, Slipknot states their logo was first registered with the US trademark registry in 2002, with the band beginning the process in 1999.
As part of that process, it claims a ‘first use’ date of 4 April 1996.
The band argues that when the unknown party registered slipknot.com in 2001, its name was already famous and the group was in the process of registering its logo.
As a result, it claims, the registration of slipknot.com was intended to profit off the band’s brand.
Cybersquatting:
As per Complete Music Update, owning a trademark in a specific name doesn’t give the owner the right to own that name “in the context of an internet domain.”
However, the US Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act can offer protection to a trademark owner if it’s proved that a “third party registered and operates a domain that features the trademark in bad faith.”
slipknot.com currently contains buttons linking off to ticketing websites and unofficial Slipknot merch.
The band claims that the owner of the domain earns money from the operators of the linked sites.
The owner is, the band states, facilitating “the sale of unauthorized and counterfeit Slipknot goods by third-party websites.”
The lawsuit alleges the owner is violating the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act by “using a domain name that is identical to the Slipknot mark with a bad faith to profit therefrom.”
The ask:
Slipknot is seeking a court order transferring ownership of slipknot.com to the band.
It is also suing for trademark infringement and unfair competition.
👋 Disclosures & Transparency Block
This story was written with information from Complete Music Update.
We covered it because it’s a lawsuit involving a high-profile band in Slipknot.
📨 Subscribe to NIF
Get news dropped in your inbox 👇
📨 Subscribe to NIF
Get news dropped in your inbox 👇
Related Articles

Policy & Legal
Dec 8, 2025
1 min read
Quebec Minister Introduces Bill to Tighten Ticket Resale Rules
It looks to extend existing restrictions

Policy & Legal
Dec 8, 2025
1 min read
Parliamentary Committee to Investigate UK Live Sector
Issues around competition and market functioning will be under the spotlight

Policy & Legal
Dec 4, 2025
1 min read
Trump Pardons Former OVG CEO Tim Leiweke On Bid Rigging Indictment
Leiweke’s charges pertained to contracts for Austin’s Moody Center arena

Quebec Minister Introduces Bill to Tighten Ticket Resale Rules
It looks to extend existing restrictions

Rod Yates
Policy
Dec 8, 2025

Parliamentary Committee to Investigate UK Live Sector
Issues around competition and market functioning will be under the spotlight

Rod Yates
Policy
Dec 8, 2025

Trump Pardons Former OVG CEO Tim Leiweke On Bid Rigging Indictment
Leiweke’s charges pertained to contracts for Austin’s Moody Center arena

Harry Levin
Policy
Dec 4, 2025

Cultural Exchange Coalition Seeks to Ease Post-Brexit Touring Hurdles
Artists and industry groups unite to improve cultural exchange between the UK and EU

Rod Yates
Policy
Dec 4, 2025

Gene Simmons to Testify Before Senate to Support Artist Radio Play Compensation
Dissimilar to streaming, AM and FM radio do not currently require royalty payouts for every play

Harry Levin
Policy
Dec 3, 2025

WMG Sues US Fashion Retailer PacSun
The label alleges unauthorized use of 290+ works on TikTok, Instagram

Rod Yates
Policy
Dec 3, 2025




