Thursday, May 05, 2011

Week 9 - Domain Name Disputes and Cybersquatting

What is cybersquatting?

Dispute resolution
What are the 3 elements of a UDRP proceeding?
Is the auDRP identical?

UDRP process
Read the case of simplybusiness.com and jappy.com (in relation to element 3) - which view do you agree with?
Read the cases of sermosucks.com and natwestbanksucks.com (in relation to criticism sites) - which view do you agree with?

Discussion
For this lecture, everyone should be prepared to discuss one case with the rest of the class - search here, or for interesting issues and WIPO's preferred views, here
What are the advantages and disadvantages of the UDRP/auDRP process?

2 comments:

Jill said...

I think the auDRP is a marked improvement on the UDRP, as there has been the opportunity to learn from the areas of confusion that have emerged in the cases. It makes more sense for the third element that the complainant is required to prove to be that either a domain name was registered in bad faith or that it was subsequently used in bad faith. Otherwise, it would be relatively easy for a respondent to succeed on the basis of being able to demonstrate initial good faith registration, regardless of their subsequent conduct. This has the potential to produce an unfair result.

QUT Student said...

Although the UDRP process is simple it is difficult to advise about it because the outcome is difficult to predict.
Once you think about the purpose of the process, I think that ICANN intended it that way. That is, the purpose is really just to stop 'cybersquatters' and not to adjudicate between people with differing commercial interests.
On that basis it would be good to see the UDRP amended to include a clause a new procedure whereby you can notify it of Court proceedings about a domain name and have it frozen so that the registrant can't just transfer it.