Johannes Christian Wichard Deputy Director WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center WIPO and ccTLDs ccTLD Best Practices: Latest and Future developments Luxembourg, July 10, 2005

Overview l WIPO and how we got involved l WIPO Domain Name Experience – UDRP Statistics – WIPO ccTLD Program l UDRP as a flexible model F Essential elements F Adjustable elements l Existing approaches

WIPO Experience in Domain Name Dispute Resolution l First WIPO Internet Domain Name Process – UDRP development and implementation l Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process – Protection of identifiers other than trademarks? l New gTLDs – Implementation of IP protection mechanisms – Report on IP implications of new gTLDs l WIPO ccTLD program – WIPO ccTLD Best Practices for the Prevention and Resolution of IP Disputes – Dispute resolution provider for 44 ccTLDs

Conflicts l Domain names are used as identifiers l Consumers expect trademarks to be present on the Internet ( l Domain name can exist only once per gTLD and is attributed on a “first-come first-served” basis l 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 l l Web Site: “under construction” l WHOIS: – Domain Name registered with US Registrar – In December 1998 – Domain registrant in Korea l Offer for sale: USD 10,000

Solution? l File a lawsuit in court But l Where? (international jurisdiction) l Under what law? l How to enforce the judgment? l Time and Money!

WIPO Internet Domain Name Process l US Government “White Paper” June 1998 l Requests WIPO to develop solutions for conflict between trademarks and domain names l WIPO Internet Domain Name Process July April 1999 – online consultations and regional consultations with the “Internet community” l Final Report April 30, 1999

WIPO Internet Domain Name Process Options Conflict Trademark - Domain Names Courts Administrative 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) l Developed on the basis of WIPO Recommendations l Adopted by ICANN l In force since December 1999 l Applicable to gTLDs l Not applicable to ccTLDs - unless explicit adoption

UDRP Procedure Overview Complaint Deficiencies member Panel? Response Notification Implement. Panel App.Decision Court? Average duration: days

l Multilingual web site with extensive explanations l Model Complaint and Response l 400 Panelists from 50 countries l Searchable Index of WIPO UDRP Panel Decisions l Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions WIPO UDRP Infrastructure

l 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 l 14,474 DNs –.com 77.7%,.net 12.0%,.org 6.7%,.info 2.0%,.biz 1.5% UDRP Statistics June 2005

l Decided: 5,551 – 4,589 (82.6%) Transfer – 47 (0.8%) Cancellation – 915 (16.5%) Denied l Terminated: – (19%) - mostly settlement l Parties from 122 countries – Complainant: US, UK, FRA, GER, SPA – Respondent: US, UK, SPA, ROK, CHINA l 12 languages – English, Spanish, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Italian, Russian, Japanese, Portuguese, Norwegian, UDRP Statistics June 2005

ccTLDs l No obligation to adopt the UDRP – But protection of IP rights? F National courts? F Less suitable the more “open” a ccTLD is l WIPO ccTLD Program: advice on request – WIPO ccTLD Best Practices F Avoiding conflicts through appropriate registration practices e.g.: registration agreement, contact details, WHOIS, submission to administrative procedure F Protecting IP in ccTLDs through administrative procedures UDRP as a model that can be adjusted and “localized”

UDRP as a flexible model l Mandatory procedure on a contractual basis – Part of domain name registration terms and conditions F Comp. UDRP contractual hierachy: Registrant---Registrar---ICANN l Efficient (quick results at moderate costs) – Direct enforcement F Transfer or cancellation (recovery of costs?) – Limited scope and streamlined procedure F Written (online) procedure F Single exchange of pleadings F Deadlines – Blocking domain name transfers during the procedure

UDRP as a flexible model l Due process safeguards – Preserve recourse to national courts of justice F Facilitates acceptance UDRP: less than 1% of all decisions contested – Neutrality F Independent of domain name registration and administration F Impartial and independent decision-makers WIPO: 400 Panelists from 50 countries F Reasoned decisions, available to the public – Notice F All possible means (Whois!) – Burden of proof on Complainant

UDRP as a flexible model l Adjustable elements, e.g.: – Trademarks only or also other identifiers? F Trade names, personal names, geographical indications,... F Country names, names and abbreviations of IGOs – Local/regional rights only or also “foreign” rights? F Factor i.a.: “Nexus” requirement for domain name registration? – Restricted to bad faith registration and/or use F Or any infringement of IP right?

UDRP as a flexible model l Adjustable elements, e.g.: – Procedure F Language(s) F Number, nationality and qualification of Panelists F Local/regional and international dispute resolution providers F Fees F Combine with mediation element l 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 l 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) F 156 in favor of complainant (mostly transfer) F 21 dismissed F 66 terminated (mostly settled) F 24 pending

WIPO ccTLD Experience l Types of Policies: – UDRP: 30 F.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 F.ae,.au,.ie,.ir,.mx,.tm,.ws – Other administrative procedure (UDRP-inspired): 4 F.ch,.li,.fr,.re – Arbitration: 4 F.ac,.nl,.pl,.sh

WIPO ccTLD Experience l WIPO ccTLD database – Links to the websites of 243 ccTLDs – Availability of registration agreement? – Existence of WHOIS service? – Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures? l We are grateful for receving your updates –

Further Information l Web Site: – l Mailing lists – l – –