Law

What Steps Can Africans Take and Lead in Internet Governance and Social Justice?

Almost three years ago, I published a blog post on CircleID titled "Internet Governance: Why Africa Should Take the Lead." I argued that African Internet stakeholders use a 'wait and see approach' in matters as critical as Internet governance," and that African voices are missing in key Internet governance discussion fora. Additionally, I suggested that some reasons for this approach, including that Africa lacks well-trained Internet governance experts and Africans see foreign affairs and international relations as an East versus West dynamic.

Can the Internet Work Across Borders?

On the face of it, the answer is a rather obvious and simple "yes"! The Internet obviously works across borders. Technically, it is a global network servicing its users wherever they may be on the planet. But it is this very nature -- the fact that the Internet is not bound to a specific country or territory -- which has more and more people asking themselves whether it can really work across borders.

Certifying to Merit and Proper Purpose in Alleging and Defending Cybersquatting Claims

Parties to a UDRP proceeding must include a certification similar in U.S. practice to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (and undoubtedly a feature in procedural codes in other judicial jurisdictions) "that the information contained in this [Complaint or Response] is to the best of [Complainant's or Respondent's] knowledge complete and accurate, that this [Complaint or Response] is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass...

The Strength of Top-Level Domains in UDRP Decisions

Another domain name dispute decision -- this one for '24hour.fitness' -- has highlighted the increasing (potential) relevance of the top-level domain (TLD) under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). As I have written before, the proliferation of new TLDs is having an impact on whether and how UDRP panels consider the TLD in their decisions.

Corresponding to Trademarks, But Nonactionable Claims for Cybersquatting

The threshold for an actionable claim under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) is a trademark in which complainant has rights. "Rights" means a trademark that could have been newly minted a moment before filing the complaint. This is different from the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) in which trademark owners must have a "mark that is distinctive at the time of registration of the domain name." The difference is important...

8 Facts About 3-Member Panels in UDRP Cases

Proceedings under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) can be heard by either a one- or three-member panel. Here are eight important facts that every complainant (trademark owner) and respondent (domain name registrant) should consider when deciding whether to select one or three members... Either party - complainant or respondent - has an opportunity to select a three-member panel...

Understanding ‘Reverse Domain Name Hijacking’ Under the UDRP

"Reverse Domain Name Hijacking" (RDNH) is a finding that a panel can make against a trademark owner in a case under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)... While neither the UDRP nor the Rules provide any further details or guidance, the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Second Edition, provides some insight into the circumstances in which panels have found RDNH.

The Importance of Protecting Credibility: Claiming and Rebutting Cybersquatting

The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) is an online dispute resolution regime. While panelists technically have discretion under Rule 13 to hold in-person hearings if they "determine[ ] ... and as an exceptional matter, that such a hearing is necessary for deciding the complaint" no in-person hearing has ever been held. Rule 13 exists to be ignored.

The Future of Software Patents

What should we do with software patents? I've seen both sides of the debate, as I work a great deal in the context of standards bodies (particularly the IETF), where software patents have impeded progress on a community-driven (and/or community-usable) standard. On the other hand, I have been listed as a co-inventor on at least 40 software patents across more than twenty years of work, and have a number of software patents either filed or in the process of being filed.

Supplementing the Record in UDRP Proceedings; When Acceptable?

The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) limits parties' submissions to complaints and responses; accepting "further statements or documents" is discretionary with the Panel (Rule 12, Procedural Orders), although the Forum (in Supplemental Rule 7) but not WIPO provides for supplementing the record with the proviso that "[a]dditional submissions must not amend the Complaint or Response." For some panelists, Rule 7 contradicts the Policy.