Remedying Cybersquatting Via Larger Damages ClaimsPresentation Transcript
Remedying Cybersquatting via Larger Damages Claims ( ? ) Cédric Manara Associate Professor of Law, EDHEC Business School <www.cedricmanara.com>
Hit the wallet!
Damages in ADR procedures? 
Preventing usual squatters from registering? 
Freezing parking revenues? 
1. Damages in ADR proceedings ?
Tremendous success of UDRP and like
But a cybersquatter does not financially suffer from a UDRP ruling
Costs are borne by the complainant only
DNS.be Terms and Conditions V4.1
10.k) Costs of dispute resolution.
The dispute resolution fee is payable by the Complainant. However, if the Third-party Decider concludes that the domain name registration needs to be struck out or transferred, DNS BE shall repay half of these costs to the Complainant and reclaim the thus repaid part from the domain name holder.
Upon DNS BE's first request, the domain name holder shall reimburse the repaid amounts. The domain name holder shall not have a right of recourse against DNS BE, the Dispute Resolution Entity, the Third-party Decider or the Complainant for the thus suffered financial loss. The potential financial loss for the domain name holder is the risk that the latter took for the speculative registration of domain names on which third parties have rights.
Is the DNS.be solution effective?
Does the respondent pay?
2. Preventing usual squatters from registering ?
Example of US online gambling restrictions
Visa and MasterCard made a policy decision not to permit the use of credit cards for opening accounts at casinos or sports books
Would it be possible to bar the use of squatters’ credit card?
A non "ICANN-dependent" solution
but a solution dependent on the registrars’ will to cooperate