Johannes Christian WichardDeputy Director

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center

WIPO and ccTLDs

ccTLD Best Practices: Latest and Future developments

Luxembourg, July 10, 2005

Overview

WIPO and how we got involved WIPO Domain Name Experience

– UDRP Statistics– WIPO ccTLD Program

UDRP as a flexible model Essential elements Adjustable elements

Existing approaches

WIPO Experience in Domain Name Dispute Resolution

First WIPO Internet Domain Name Process– UDRP development and implementation

Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process– Protection of identifiers other than trademarks?

New gTLDs– Implementation of IP protection mechanisms– Report on IP implications of new gTLDs

WIPO ccTLD program– WIPO ccTLD Best Practices for the Prevention and

Resolution of IP Disputes– Dispute resolution provider for 44 ccTLDs

Conflicts

Domain names are used as identifiers Consumers expect trademarks to be present on the

Internet (www.TRADEMARK.com) Domain name can exist only once per gTLD and is

attributed on a “first-come first-served” basis Trademarks are an easy target for “cybersquatters”

– Register trademarks as domain names in order to profit financially on the expense of the trademark owner

Conflict: Hypothetical

<yvessaintlaurent.com> Web Site: “under construction” WHOIS:

– Domain Name registered with US Registrar– In December 1998– Domain registrant in Korea

Offer for sale: USD 10,000

Solution?

File a lawsuit in court

But

Where? (international jurisdiction) Under what law? How to enforce the judgment? Time and Money!

WIPO Internet Domain Name Process

US Government “White Paper” June 1998 Requests WIPO to develop solutions for conflict

between trademarks and domain names WIPO Internet Domain Name Process July 1998 -

April 1999– online consultations and regional consultations with the

“Internet community” Final Report April 30, 1999

WIPO Internet Domain Name Process

Options

Conflict Trademark - Domain Names

CourtsAdministrative

Procedure

A procedure permitting trademark owners to resolve clear cases of abusive domain name registration (cybersquatting) without going to court

Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)

Developed on the basis of WIPO Recommendations Adopted by ICANN In force since December 1999 Applicable to gTLDs Not applicable to ccTLDs - unless explicit adoption

UDRP ProcedureOverview

Complaint

Deficiencies

+3 +20

+5 +14

3 member Panel?

+5 +15

+10

Response

Notifica

tion

Implement

.Panel A

pp.

Decision

Court?

Average duration: 45-60 days

Multilingual web site with extensive explanations

Model Complaint and Response

400 Panelists from 50 countries

Searchable Index of WIPO UDRP Panel Decisions Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP

Questions

WIPO UDRP Infrastructure

7,633 cases since December 1999– 1999: 1 – 2000: 1,857 – 2001: 1,557 – 2002: 1,207 – 2003: 1,100– 2004: 1,176– Jan.-June 2005: 735

14,474 DNs– .com 77.7%, .net 12.0%, .org 6.7%, .info 2.0%, .biz 1.5%

UDRP StatisticsJune 2005

Decided: 5,551– 4,589 (82.6%) Transfer– 47 (0.8%) Cancellation– 915 (16.5%) Denied

Terminated: – 1.419 (19%) - mostly settlement

Parties from 122 countries– Complainant: US, UK, FRA, GER, SPA– Respondent: US, UK, SPA, ROK, CHINA

12 languages – English, Spanish, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Italian,

Russian, Japanese, Portuguese, Norwegian,

UDRP StatisticsJune 2005

ccTLDs No obligation to adopt the UDRP

– But protection of IP rights? National courts? Less suitable the more “open” a ccTLD is

WIPO ccTLD Program: advice on request– WIPO ccTLD Best Practices

Avoiding conflicts through appropriate registration practices • e.g.: registration agreement, contact details, WHOIS, submission to

administrative procedure

Protecting IP in ccTLDs through administrative procedures• UDRP as a model that can be adjusted and “localized”

UDRP as a flexible model Mandatory procedure on a contractual basis

– Part of domain name registration terms and conditions Comp. UDRP contractual hierachy:

Registrant---Registrar---ICANN Efficient (quick results at moderate costs)

– Direct enforcement Transfer or cancellation (recovery of costs?)

– Limited scope and streamlined procedure Written (online) procedure Single exchange of pleadings Deadlines

– Blocking domain name transfers during the procedure

UDRP as a flexible model Due process safeguards

– Preserve recourse to national courts of justice Facilitates acceptance

• UDRP: less than 1% of all decisions contested

– Neutrality Independent of domain name registration and

administration Impartial and independent decision-makers

• WIPO: 400 Panelists from 50 countries

Reasoned decisions, available to the public

– Notice All possible means (Whois!)

– Burden of proof on Complainant

UDRP as a flexible model Adjustable elements, e.g.:

– Trademarks only or also other identifiers? Trade names, personal names, geographical

indications,... Country names, names and abbreviations of IGOs

– Local/regional rights only or also “foreign” rights? Factor i.a.: “Nexus” requirement for domain name

registration?

– Restricted to bad faith registration and/or use Or any infringement of IP right?

UDRP as a flexible model Adjustable elements, e.g.:

– Procedure Language(s) Number, nationality and qualification of Panelists Local/regional and international dispute resolution providers Fees Combine with mediation element

Balance: – IP owners’ interest in uniformity and possibility of

consolidating complaints against the same dn holder– Need for adaptations to local environment

WIPO ccTLD Experience

Center: Dispute Resolution Provider for 44 ccTLDs – initial period: smaller (.sh) or “de facto” gTLDs (.tv)– then: more established TLDs (.au, .ie, .mx, .nl, .ch, .fr)– 267 cases (30 June 2005)

156 in favor of complainant (mostly transfer) 21 dismissed 66 terminated (mostly settled) 24 pending

WIPO ccTLD Experience

Types of Policies:– UDRP: 30

.ag, .am, .as, .bs, .bz, .cc, .cd, .co, .cy, .dj, .ec, .fj, .gt, .ki, .la, .md, .mw, .na, .nu, .pa, .ph, .pk, .pn, .ro, .sc, .tk, .tt, .tv, .ue, .ve

– Variations of UDRP: 7 .ae, .au, .ie, .ir, .mx, .tm, .ws

– Other administrative procedure (UDRP-inspired): 4 .ch, .li, .fr, .re

– Arbitration: 4 .ac, .nl, .pl, .sh

WIPO ccTLD Experience

WIPO ccTLD database– Links to the websites of 243 ccTLDs

– Availability of registration agreement?

– Existence of WHOIS service?

– Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures? We are grateful for receving your updates

– arbiter.mail@wipo.int

Further Information

Web Site:– http://arbiter.wipo.int

Mailing lists– http://arbiter.wipo.int/subscribe/all.html

E-mail:– arbiter.mail@wipo.int– christian.wichard@wipo.int