Domain Disputes Overview of UDRP Procedures 6/5/2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 drt 6455 eCommerce Law lesson 7 – IT and Intellectual Property (part 2) associate professor faculty of law university of montreal university of montreal.
Advertisements

The use of Trademarks on the Internet: Problems and solutions Trademark owners perspective Marques cyberspace team September 2012.
Chapter 11: Domain Names and Other Trademark Issues on the Internet By: Adrian Lui.
Use of Trademarks in Domain Names & Domain Name Disputes.
CYBERSQUATTING: PREVENTION AND REMEDIATION STRATEGIES NET2002 – Washington, DC April 18, 2002 Scott Bearby NCAA Associate General Counsel Copyright Scott.
Intellectual Property Presentation Web Professionals ICC Jonathan LA Phillips Shay Kepple Phillips, Ltd. 456 Fulton St., Ste. 255 Peoria, Illinois.
Governmental Advisory Committee New gTLD Program Briefing 19 June 2010.
Margie Milam Senior Policy Counselor ICANN 1 ( All views expressed are my own)
Litigation and Alternatives for Settling Civil Disputes CHAPTER FIVE.
™ May 8, 2015 Copyright
Cyprus – Nicosia October, 2003 The management of domain names and metatags within a company Cyprus – Nicosia October, 2003 Etienne Wéry, Attorney - Brussels.
According to PTO, a trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination thereof, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods.
NewTLDs: Implications for Trademark Owners Mike Rodenbaugh Online Brand Management in the World of New gTLDs MelbourneIT Strategy Seminar November 21,
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 11, 2008 Trademark – Domain Names.
Trademark and Unfair Comp. Boston College Law School April 9, 2008 Domain Names.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 1, 2009 Trademark – Domain Names.
Trademark Cases And now for something confusingly similar Steve Baron Bradley IM 350 Fall 2010.
Johannes Christian Wichard Deputy Director WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center WIPO and ccTLDs ccTLD Best Practices: Latest and Future developments Luxembourg,
1 Domain Name Disputes Rami Olwan Bibliotheca Alexandrina IP and the Digital Age Workshop December 2008.
Dublin, May 2, 2003 Corporate Domain Names Management Dublin, May 2, 2003 Etienne Wéry, Attorney - Brussels and Paris bars Teacher at « Université Paris.
«ccTLD.RU: regulation» Pavel Khramtsov Moscow-2008.
Trade Marks and Domain Names: new developments UNSW: Cyberspace regulation Patrick Gunning 24 May 2001.
Resolving Domain Name Disputes Sean M. Mead Mead, Mead & Clark, P.C. Salem, Indiana.
9 - 1 © 2007 Prentice Hall, Business Law, sixth edition, Henry R. Cheeseman Chapter 17: E-Contracts and Licensing.
Indiana Patent Troll Statute for Demand Letters HEA Bad Faith Assertions of Patent Infringement.
Chapter 5 E- Commerce and Dispute Resolution. 2 Chapter Objectives 1. Describe how the courts are dealing with jurisdictional issues with respect to cyberspace.
Domain Names Ferenc Suba LLM, MA Chairman of the Board, CERT-Hungary, Theodore Puskás Foundation Vice-Chair of the Management Board, European Network and.
Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT) Proposal Comments Sue Todd, Director, Product Management Monday 11 May 2009, San Francisco.
The New Legal Landscape for Event Industry Social Media Kathryn Carrier, Esq. © 2011 Katy Carrier.
Business Law for the Entrepreneur and Manager
Trademark II Infringement. Article 57 Infringement Article 57 Any of the following conduct shall be an infringement upon the right to exclusively use.
The Case Against Cybersquatting A Discussion of Domain Name Trademark Protection By Matt Poole.
MANAGEMENT & LEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF eCOMMERCE Trade Marks & Domain Names Chapter 8, Forder & Quirk.
Report of the WIPO Internet Domain Name Process. Genesis USG White Paper, June 5, 1998: –“The U.S. Government will seek international support to call.
Dispute Resolution and the Internet By John Zillmer.
Amber Bennett Cybersquatting. Introduction What is cybersquatting? Cyber: Internet Squatting: to live in a building or on land without the owner’s permission.
NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION REGULATORY PRACTICES WORKSHOP MODULE: 4 INVESTIGATION.
Brand Protection In China Eligio Pimentel
Real and Virtual Identities Francis Gurry Assistant Director General World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
Sam Funnell Managing Principal Solicitor Commercial & Property Branch Government Branding.
Trademarks IV Domain Names & Trademarks Class 23 Notes Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2004 Professor Wagner.
Domain Names & Domain Names Dispute Resolution Downloaded from
1 ICANN’s New gTLD Program: Trademark-related Concerns Arbitration and Mediation Center World Intellectual.
Chapter 17 E-Commerce and Digital Law
Domain Name Registration Sanjay Gupta August 29, 2008.
CYBERLAW CLASS 14 Regulating Domain Name Disputes – ICANN and the International System Oct. 15, 2002.
Commerce Done by: Sadoun AL-Suwaida Turki AL-Anazi.
OECD - HCOPIL - ICC Conference on Building Trust in the Online Environment The Hague, December 11-12, 2000 THE ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION EXPERIENCE OF.
Trademark Cases And now for something confusingly similar
Infringement Claims and Defenses Professor Todd Bruno.
Trademark Cases And now for something confusingly similar
Trademarks IV Domain Names & Trademarks Class Notes: April 9, 2003 Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2003 Professor Wagner.
Chapter 5 Trademark and the Internet. Trademarks and the Internet Concerns Cybersquatting Cybergriping Keyword advertising-courts disagree on what is.
Implementation of the.eu Top Level Domain Marko Bonač Arnes.
On the Internet, No-one Knows You're a … Cat! Absurdity and the UDRP David HELLAM GA ČR S.
1 Trademark Infringement and Dilution Steve Baron March 6, 2003.
International Intellectual Property Profs. Atik and Manheim Fall, 2006 Cybersquatting [slides by David Steele]
Trademark Law1  Nov. 20, 2006  Week 12 Chapter 11 – Trademarks and the Internet.
HOW TO PROTECT YOUR INTEREST IN A SALE CONTRACT Focus on what you “get” when you sign!
May 19, 1999Japan Network Information Center 1 Dispute Policy of JP domains by Naomasa Maruyama 丸山 直昌 JPNIC at ChinaInet 99, May 19,
Use of Trademarks in Domain Names & Domain Name Disputes
Trademark and the Internet
ICANN’s Policy Development Activities
Rights Protection Mechanism Report to the ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee
PROTECTING YOUR BRAND ONLINE
Trademark Law Meets The Internet
E-Contracts and Internet Law
Overview & Guideline for Dispute Resolution Mechanism
Chapter 3: Trademarks in E-Commerce.
Presentation transcript:

Domain Disputes Overview of UDRP Procedures 6/5/2015

Domains = $$$$ dellfinancialservices.com kodak.ru: 1 year + 20 lawsuits later myverizonwireless.com, iphoneverizonplans.com, and verizon-cellular.com: $33 million later... scartletjohansson.com: Scam sweepstakes to collect addresses BBC.com: Had to win back its domain

Why Dispute/Defend a Domain? Domain Hijacking (“Cyber Squatting”): Register to resell Typo Squatting: Registering common misspellings of famous domains to resell or confuse consumers Reverse Domain Hijacking: Making false cyber squatting claim to force domain transfer Confusion: Domain is like TM and site markets similar products

UDRP Nuts and Bolts Uniform Domain-Name Resolution Policy (UDRP) Jurisdiction: Why UDRP? –Registrant must "represent and warrant", registering "will not infringe upon or otherwise violate the rights of any third party” –Registrant agrees to participate in UDRP process Who Can File: Any legal entity –Owning a registered trademark –Licensed to use a registered trademark –Able to establish rights in a well known prior trademark, or –show an unregistered use

UDRP Nuts and Bolts: Cont. Available Relief: –The transfer of the domain name: No opportunity to recover damages –top level domain names ("gTLDs": e.g..com;.info;.biz;.mobi;.net;.org) –names corresponding to the codes of countries ("ccTLDs")which have adopted the UDRP –Countries not adopting UDRP handled locally Cost: Depends on Forum and Panel Size –WIPO Arbitration Center: $1500/$4000 –National Arbitration Forum: $1300/$2600 –Budget $1500 to $5000 (or more) attorney time depending on complexity

UDRP Nuts and Bolts: Cont. Timing: Complaint through final Decision –Average around 60 days, less if no response –Extensions of time available for “extenuating” circumstances –Actual domain transfer estimate additional 2-4 weeks Losing Domain holder has 10 days after decision to file a lawsuit before transfer Must request transfer! Not automatic

The Complaint: Prove Three Elements Domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights Domain name holder has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name The domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith

The Complaint: Identical or Confusing Only similarity between the trademark and the domain name is considered The panel makes a visual and verbal comparison taking the trademark's distinctive nature into account. Panel does not consider the products or services (in this step) – not a substantive likelihood of confusion analysis

The Complaint: No Legitimate Interest Must try to prove a negative Offer evidence of lack of rights: –Parked domain: Not using it? –Content of site: Is it a real company doing business? –Passing off? –Commonly known by domain name? Burden of proof then on domain holder to dispute complainant's evidence and show legitimate interest Not an exclusive list: Bring any evidence

The Complaint: Used in Bad Faith Sell/rent to the Complainant/TM owner or to a competitor for value beyond out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain Prevent the Complainant/TM owner from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name (must show pattern of such conduct) Trying to disrupt the business of a competitor Trying to intentionally attract, for commercial gain, Internet users by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement Can show other evidence: Not an exclusive list

The Response: Disprove Only One Element Domain name is not identical or confusingly similar: Sometimes tough to do. Have rights or legitimate interest: –Put on proof of business activity using the mark –More time is better Not registered in bad faith –No need to prove bad faith if shown legitimate interest in the mark –Argue it, but Panel may stop at legitimate interest Laches: A recent defense but effective one. –Complainant new about the domain and did nothing until now. Longer is better! (ex. <15 years) –Harm to legitimate interest of domain holder very helpful

Overview of UDRP process

Practice Tips Read the rules and the policy! (and supplemental rules for your forum!)the rules policy supplemental rules Start with current copy of model complaint/response Threaten registrar to give up domain holder’s info: May be able to resolve early Understand the issues and try to resolve early Not a Trademark lawsuit: Stay on point Use past UDRP cases in arguments Exhibits: Include them! More is better

Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) Quicker/Cheaper: $350-$500, days Applies only to new gTLDs, or ccTLDs adopting URS Additional defenses written into URS: –Domain is descriptive, and making fair use –Domain is operated as a tribute or criticism in FU –Domain not part of a pattern No opportunity to amend complaint Higher Standard of Proof: –Complaint denied where Panel finds contestable issue –lack of clear and convincing evidence Cannot assert common law TM Rights Domain is suspended, not transferred Why use it? Registered TM vs. clear cybersquatting