Domain Name Dispute Resolution
.COM companies are all the rage with the stock market riding
high and falling as the mood shifts. Everybody it appears is
going on-line and there has been a massive rush to register all
manner of domain names. In February 2000 there were over 200,000
.co.uk domains registered compared to just under 15,000 at the
same time last year and there were just under 9,500,000 .com
domains registered by 1st March 2000! The domain name is seen as
central to any marketing strategy as it is the "sign post" to
the web site hopefully worth millions!
However, due to the simple fact that the internet is global,
there are not enough domain names to go round and problems arise
when there are competing businesses with the same name. To
address this problem the World Intellectual Property
Organisation (WIPO) through their Arbitration and Mediation
Centre established a dispute resolution service to allow a cheap
and effective means of resolving disputes without going to
court. It follows the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers (ICANN) dispute resolution policy which deals with
disputes concerning .com, .net, and .org domain names.
The ICANN procedure is only available for disputes concerning
allegedly "abusive" registration of the domain name. There are
three criteria that have to be met.
1.The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a
trademark or servicemark in which the complainer has rights;
2.The domain name holder has no rights or legitimate interests
in the domain name; and
3.The domain name has been registered and is being used in bad
faith.
A series of examples of bad faith are given in the ICANN policy
document.
A recent case heard by the WIPO arbitration and mediation centre
demonstrates the effectiveness of the procedures. In Digitronics
Inventioneering Corporation -v- @Six.Net Registered the two
domain names in question were "sixnet.com" and "six.net". The
complaint was submitted electronically to the WIPO Centre on
17th January 2000 and a Panel appointed. The claimant alleged
that the domain name holder had no rights or legitimate
interests in respect of the domain name and that the domain name
had been registered in bad faith.
The Panel decided that the respondent had been known by the
domain name "Sixnet" even though it had acquired no trademark or
servicemark rights. As the complainer had failed to establish
that @Six.Net had no rights or legitimate interests in the
domain name the application was refused. Of particular interest
is the fact that the respondents were a Canadian company and the
claimants were registered in New York. Using the WIPO Panel
complex jurisdictional problems were avoided. The decision was
issued on 1st March 2000 only six weeks after the claim was
raised.
Using the WIPO arbitration and mediation centre the parties were
able to come to a cost effective resolution to an International
dispute within the specified timescale of between 45 and 50
days.