Law

5 Myths About DMCA ‘Take-Down’ Notices

The so-called notice-and-take-down provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) provide both a very effective tool for copyright owners to get infringing content removed from the Internet as well as an important protection for service providers (such as website hosting companies) that may inadvertently publish infringing material, either directly or via user-generated content.

Open Internet Access on the Line in Brussels

This summer EU regulators are finalizing their guidelines for member states on legal protections for wired, wireless and mobile open Internet access service. European citizens, businesses and NGOs have one last chance to make their voices heard on the so-called "net neutrality" guidelines by writing a comment for Body of European Regulators of Electronic Communications (BEREC) by July 18.

Domain Names Identical to Trademarks But No Likelihood of Confusion

Confusion is a basic element in both cybersquatting and trademark infringement. It appears twice in the UDRP; once in paragraph 4(a)(i) in the adjectival phrase "confusing similarity", and once in paragraph 4(b)(iv) in the phrase "likelihood of confusion." Each use of the distinctive phrases is directed to a different observer. More of this in a moment. The first relates to standing; the second to infringement. Unless a party has standing it can have no actionable claim.

Cyber Infringement of Trademarks by Typosquatting

A fabled, serial cybersquatter of the early Internet argued that typographical errors in domain names were not cybersquatting at all because they had their own distinct identities. Moreover, "I have" (he argued) "just as much right to own the [misspelled] Domain Names as the person who owns the correct spelling of [a] domain name." That dispute involved and <wallstreet journel.com>. Dow Jones & Company, Inc. and Dow Jones LP v. John Zuccarini, D2000-0578 (WIPO September 10, 2000).

Luddites of the 21St Century Unite? (Revisited)

In the winter of 2014 I wrote a blogpost under the title 'Luddites of the 21st century unite?' (read here). In the post I wondered where the 21st century Luddites were. ICT, automation, artificial intelligence all threatened jobs, yet all those affected embraced smartphones and the Internet in droves. It seems I found them, but what to do? Brexit and Luddites Fast forward to early summer 2016.

No Time Bar for Cybersquatting Claims Under UDRP

Headline in TheDomains.com, June 18, 2016: "Wow: 20 Year Old Domain Name WorldTradeCenter.com Lost in UDRP." For those who don't follow UDRP decisions carefully this may elicit, how can this be? Well, surprised or not, and assuming complainant has priority in the string of characters that is both a domain name and a trademark... delay is not a factor in prevailing on cybersquatting claims when there is an alignment of other factors...

The Popularity of .co (not .com) Domain Name Disputes

One of the most popular top-level domains under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) is not even a gTLD (generic top-level domain). It's a ccTLD: .co, the country-code top-level domain for Colombia, in South America. Based on statistics at WIPO as of this writing, 29 .co domain names have been the subject of UDRP disputes this year, making it the most-disputed ccTLD under the popular domain name dispute policy.

Statutory Remedies for UDRP Grievants

The U.S. is unusual in that grievants of a UDRP award have a statutory remedy from an adverse UDRP award, namely an action for declaratory judgement under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA). The action is not an appeal, but a de novo assessment of the parties' rights, either that the domain name holder is cybersquatting or its registration was lawful. Under U.S. law UDRP awards are not treated as arbitration awards subject to the Federal Arbitration Act but as new disputes.

The DotBible Litmus Test for Domain Name Dispute Panelists

A dispute policy for the new '.bible' top-level domain name requires panelists who agree to hear cases to affirm that they "enthusiastically support the mission of American Bible Society" and that they "believe that the Bible is the Word of God which brings salvation through Christ." The DotBible Community Dispute Resolution Policy appears to be the first domain name dispute policy that requires panelists to take a religious oath - or, for that matter, an oath other than anything related to maintaining neutrality.

Which Direction Will the Internet Go? Take Our Survey and Help Us Explore the Forces at Work

In the past seven years, the number of people online has essentially doubled, from 1.7 billion in 2009 to about 3.4 billion today. New and innovative services have also emerged and people and companies around the world are using the Internet in ways barely imagined at the turn of the decade. Looking ahead to the next five to seven years, there are many forces at work that could have a significant impact on the Internet.