Brand Protection |
Sponsored by |
UDRP decisions come down from providers (principally from WIPO and the Forum) at the rate of 7 to 10 a day. Complainants mostly prevail; this is because in 90% of the cases (more or less that percentage) respondents have no plausible defense and generally don't bother appearing, although default alone is not conclusive of cybersquatting; there must be evidence of infringement. When complainants do not prevail, it is not because they lack rights...
I'll admit I tend to get evangelical when I'm talking about .brands. To me and the team at Neustar, every development in this space is exciting and significant and we're always eager to share the latest news and insights. But you don't have to be a .brands nut to see that the last few weeks have shown some serious signs of momentum. And it makes me wonder, with everything that's developed in just the last week or two, could we be set for October to be the biggest month in .brands we've ever seen?
There is only less than one week left for the second edition of the Brands and Domains conference to take place in The Hague, Netherlands, at the Amrath Kurhaus. The domaining conference will be held during the 2nd and 3rd of October, 'the place to be' for all those whose companies are interested in developing the so-called dotBrands. More than 500 companies have already requested their dotBrand domain, and many of them are already using it, but it is 'together' how we can move forward...
The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) is known as an inexpensive alternative to litigation (and that's true), but some proceedings can end up costing a trademark owner more than it may have expected. There are generally two additional types of expenses that can arise during the course of a UDRP proceeding: (1) extra filing fees for certain aspects of a case filed at the Forum, and (2) an increased filing fee if the domain name registrant wants a three-member panel to decide the case.
After its first edition in Valencia, Brands and Domains will travel this time to the Netherlands where the second conference will take place from the 2nd to 3rd of October 2017. This time, Dot Stories, the main organizer, chose the Hotel Amrath Kurhaus for the event. Nowadays, more than 600 applicants hold already the right to start their own dot brand, but there are not so many who have been brave enough to use it.
In order to be able to reply to the question of whether a new set of governance mechanisms are necessary to regulate the new Global Top Level Domains (gTLDs), one should first consider how efficiently the current Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) from the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has performed and then move to the evaluation of the Implementations Recommendations Team (ITR) recommendations.
The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) has never required that a complainant own any trademark registrations to succeed in a domain name dispute, given that common law trademark rights (if properly established) are sufficient. But, as a pair of recent UDRP decisions reminds us, even some registrations are inadequate. The issue relates to the first element of every UDRP complaint, which requires the party seeking relief to prove that the "domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark...
The Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS) is often described as a domain name dispute policy that applies to the new gTLDs. While that's true, the URS is actually broader than that. The URS (a quick and inexpensive policy that allows a trademark owner to obtain the temporary suspension of a domain name) applies to more than just the new gTLDs, that is, those top-level domains that are a part of ICANN's 2012 domain name expansion.
If a national government wants to prevent certain kinds of Internet communication inside its borders, the costs can be extreme and success will never be more than partial. VPN and tunnel technologies will keep improving as long as there is demand, and filtering or blocking out every such technology will be a never-ending game of one-upmanship. Everyone knows and will always know that determined Internet users will find a way to get to what they want, but sometimes the symbolic message is more important than the operational results.
Naming is the first imperative. It precedes the launching of new lives as much as it does new businesses. Names secure a presence, and for businesses in the marketplace names can grow into trademarks, if they function like one. Are we not sometimes made aware that not all names are equally distinctive, and that some of them are distinctly commonplace?