This paper examines the central role and Scope of ICANN, which is the Internet's naming system's UDRP Policy & Rules Framework, to discussing how the jurisprudence around Administrative Procedure under this framework operates under the "Bad Faith" principle, alongside the Scope of "Domestic court intervention, to finally evaluating how the procedure is exercised. The quantity of registered domain names has increased in tandem with the growth of the Internet. Anarchy has spread across this niche area of intellectual property since the '.com' bubble burst, which has increased the frequency of domain name disputes. Trademark holders may use the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), an international policy adopted by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, to resolve disputes about who owns an Internet domain name (ICANN). In October of 1999, the policy was implemented, and by December of the same year, the first case had been closed. Domain name dispute resolution has come a long way since then, thanks in large part to the UDRP. However, an examination of the cases determined under the UDRP scheme reveals a different narrative. The current article includes a critical analysis of a selection of these determined instances, as well as a discussion of the UDRP's deficiencies and some proposals for its improvement.