Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

2014 01 18 adndrc conference (cc version)

262

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
262
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   Dr.  Emmanuel  GILLET   2014  ADNDRC  Conference   Teaching  Fellow,  The  Hong   Kong  Polytechnic  University   Rethinking  Domain  Name   Dispute  ResoluKon  in  the  Era   of  New  gTLDs   Kuala  Lumpur,  18th  January   2014   ì  
  • 2. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   ì   Background. − On the 18 January 2014, the Malaysian branch of the Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Center (ADNDRC) hold a conference entitled “Rethinking Domain Name Disputes Resolution in the Era of newgTLDs”. Summary. − Fifteen years after the UDRP was adopted, there has been an unprecedented increase of domain names resources. ICANN is in the process of liberalizing the creation of new top level domains. Furthermore, new technologies now allow the registration of internationalized domain names (IDNs). Resources will soon be almost endless and extremely varied (new TLDs + IDNs + IPV6). At the same time, one can question the effectiveness of the UDRP in achieving its goal: fighting cybersquatting. Indeed, in 70% of WIPO cases, disputed domain names are transferred to the claimant. An analysis of the UDRP case law and similar rules shows that the whole system has already evolved, thanks to the UDRP panelists (consolidation, re-filing, etc.) and the ccTLDs registries (mediation, appeal, reimbursement of legal fees, arbitration, etc.). However, good ideas are scattered like pieces of a puzzle. The whole system could be improved by i) giving Lady Justice the sword she is missing in domain names dispute resolution proceedings and ii) gathering all the good ideas together. Some of the arguments shared in this presentation are available in the following article: Emmanuel GILLET, “Procédures extrajudiciaires de règlement des litiges relatifs aux noms de domaine : quelles perspectives pour l’arbitrage ?”, Versailles International Business Law Review, 2013, No. 4, pp. 145-168. Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com    
  • 3. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP             New  “g”TLDS  +  IDNs  +  IPV6   =   Endless  possibiliKes  for  cybersqua[ers   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com     ì  
  • 4. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP       1.  The  Failure  of  DN  Dispute  ResoluKon  Mechanisms   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons   3.  Going  Further   4.  Gathering  Good  Ideas  in  One  Place   5.  Towards  ArbitraKon?   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 5. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   1.  The  Failure  of  DN  Dispute  ResoluKon  Mechanisms                       FighKng  Cybersquabng!   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 6. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   1.  The  Failure  of  DN  Dispute  ResoluKon  Mechanisms                       Statement  of  Account…   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 7. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   1.  The  Failure  of  DN  Dispute  ResoluKon  Mechanisms                       ≈  40.000  UDRP  decisions   +  ccTLDs  related  decisions   }   14  years   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 8. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   1.  The  Failure  of  DN  Dispute  ResoluKon  Mechanisms                       70%  WIPO  Decisions  à  Transfer  granted   Source:  wipo.int   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 9. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   1.  The  Failure  of  DN  Dispute  ResoluKon  Mechanisms                       Success  or  Failure?     Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 10. ì   Success  or  Failure.?    
  • 11. ì   Success  or  Rethink.?    
  • 12. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.1.  Improvements  Made  by  Panelists          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 13. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   ì   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.1.  Improvements  Made  by  Panelists                  2.1.1.  Re-­‐Filing  (Same  domain  name  +  Same  parKes)     CondiKons:  “A  refiled  case  may  only  be  accepted  in  limited  circumstances.  These   circumstances   include   when   the   complainant   establishes   in   the   complaint   that   relevant  new  acKons  have  occurred  since  the  original  decision,  or  that  a  breach   of  natural  jusKce  or  of  due  process  has  occurred,  or  that  there  was  other  serious   misconduct  in  the  original  case  (such  as  perjured  evidence).  A  refiled  complaint   would  usually  also  be  accepted  if  it  includes  newly  presented  evidence  that  was   reasonably   unavailable   to   the   complainant   during   the   original   case”   (WIPO   Overview  2.0,  para.  4.4.,  consensus).   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com  
  • 14. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   ì   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.1.  Improvements  Made  by  Panelists                  2.1.2.  ConsolidaKon     CondiKons:  (i)  the  complainants  either  have  a  specific  common  grievance  against   the   respondent,   or   the   respondent   has   engaged   in   common   conduct   that   has   affected  the  complainants'  individual  rights  in  a  similar  fashion;  (ii)  it  would  be   equitable  and  procedurally  efficient  to  permit  the  consolidaKon;  or  in  the  case  of   complaints   brought   (whether   or   not   filed   by   mulKple   complainants)   against   more   than   one   respondent,   where   (i)   the   domain   names   or   the   websites   to   which   they   resolve   are   subject   to   common   control,   and   (ii)   the   consolidaKon   would  be  fair  and  equitable  to  all  parKes  (WIPO  Overview  2.0,  para.  4.1).   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com  
  • 15. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.1.  MediaKon   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 16. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   ì   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.1.  MediaKon   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   Source:  Nominet.org.uk   .UK  
  • 17. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   ì   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.2.  Appeal   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   Source:  Nominet.org.uk   .UK  
  • 18. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                 UDRP  à  ccTLDs  DRP     ccTLDs  DRP  à  UDRP   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 19. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.3.  Fees   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 20. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.3.  Fees   UDRP  and  JusKce   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 21. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.3.  Fees   UDRP  and  JusKce   §  Blindfold   §  Scale   §  Sword   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 22. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.3.  Fees   No  sword  à  No  Legal  risk   No  Legal  Risk  à  No  dissuasion   No  Dissuasion  /  Threat  à  No  JusKce   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 23. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.3.  Fees                                     1st  concepKon   2nd  ConcepKon   Each  party  pays  its  own  fees   The  losing  party  pays  the  fees   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 24. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.3.  Fees                                     T.   EISENBERG   and   G.   P.   MILLER,   “The   English   Versus   the   American   Rule   on   A[orneys   Fees:   An   Empirical   Study   of   Public   Company   Contracts”,  98  Cornell  L.  R.  327   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 25. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   ì   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.3.  Fees                                     Source:  wipo.int   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com  
  • 26. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   ì   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.3.  Fees                                     Source:  wipo.int   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com  
  • 27. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   2.  Significant  Procedural  EvoluKons          2.2.  Improvements  Made  by  Registries                  2.2.3.  Fees                            WIPO  Expedited  ArbitraKon  Rules           ì     [.AC,  .IO,  .SH]     ArKcle  59  “Award  of  Costs  of  ArbitraKon”     (c)  The  Tribunal  shall,  subject  to  any  agreement  of  the  parKes,  apporKon  the  costs   of  arbitraKon  and  the  administraKon  fees  of  the  Center  between  the  parKes  in  the   light  of  all  the  circumstances  and  the  outcome  of  the  arbitraKon.   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com  
  • 28. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   3.  Going  Further:  ConsolidaKon  in  Cases  of  MulKple  TLDs   gTLDs   ccTLDs   New  TLDs   Shera[on.info   Chera[on.be   Sheraton.berlin   Sherraton.com   Shera[ton.za   Sheraton.bzh   Etc.   Etc.   Etc.   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 29. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   3.  Going  Further:  ConsolidaKon  in  Cases  of  MulKple  TLDs   gTLDs   ccTLDs   New  TLDs   Shera[on.info   Chera[on.be   Sheraton.berlin   Sherraton.com   Shera[ton.za   Sheraton.bzh   5  different  procedures  +  potenKally  5  dispute  resoluKon  providers   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 30. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   4.  Gathering  Good  Ideas  in  One  Place   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 31. Current  SituaKon   ì   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com  
  • 32. Goal   ì   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com  
  • 33. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   5.  Towards  ArbitraKon?         UDRP  and  Co.    ≠    ArbitraKon   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 34. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP   5.  Towards  ArbitraKon?         Advantages   Risks   New  York  ConvenKon   (149  signatories(1))   Expensive   Enforcement  to  recover  the   costs   (even  damages)   Delay   Controlling  the  Risks   Fast-­‐Track  ArbitraKon   (controlling  Kme  and  costs)     Possibility  to  appeal   (3  arbitrators)   No  need  to  go  to  courts   (1)  18  January  2014   Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  
  • 35. Rethinking  Domain  Name  Disputes  ResoluKon  in  the  Era  of  New  gTLDs     è Notable  Procedural  Issues  in  UDRP       email   blog   Thank  you       mail@egillet.com     h[p://egillet.com     Emmanuel  GILLET,  Hong  Kong  Polytechnic  University,  Business  School  −  mail@egillet.com   ì  

×