logomap E-BOOKS  |  HOME  |  CONTACT US 
Internet Law
Books
internet patents
Internet Patents Worldwide

internet advertising
Internet Advertising Law

digital media
Digital Media: Copyrights and Piracy

domain name law and disputes
Domain Name Law & Disputes

can you patent this
Can You Patent This?

public domain
Internet Search - Public Domain v. Intellectual Property Rights

search engine trends
Emerging Trends: Search Engine Regulations
 

Internet Law Books

Go Back

E-Books Series is a concentration of the most relevant information on e-commerce and Internet laws and regulations around the world. Conveniently divided in sections consisting of articles on specific topics, supplemented with links to the sources of law and regulations, e-Books provide an excellent and quick resource of knowledge on Internet and e-commerce issues and applicable principles of law. Electronically accessed supplemental materials are provided to enhance a dynamic informative process. E-Books are conveniently accessible online or through a downloadable version. A pocket size version of eBooks is also available. IBLS e-Book Series reserves all intellectual property rights. Any re-distribution of this material without appropriate license will be prohibited. For license inquiries write to e-books@ibls.com



 

Domain Names Laws and Disputes

Buy Now

spacerspacer
spacer

Domain Names Laws and Disputes

 spacerspacer
spacer
 Introduction
 Chapter 1: Introduction to Domain Name Generalities
arrowHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PROPOSES LEGISLATION THAT WOULD CRIMINALIZE FALSE DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION
arrowIN REM JURISDICTION NOT PERMITTED FOR ACTIONS INVOLVING THE FEDERAL TRADEMARK DILUTION ACT
arrowDOMAIN NAME REGISTRATIONS ARE A CONTRACT FOR SERVICES AND CANNOT BE GARNISHED
arrowDOMAIN NAME IS AN INTANGIBLE PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CONVERSION UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW
arrowDOMAIN NAMES AND DILUSION OF TRADEMARKS
arrowDOMAIN NAMES IN GERMANY
arrowGENERIC TERMS IN DOMAIN NAMES (GERMANY)
 Chapter 2: Domain Name Disputes
arrowDECISIONS BY ICANN APPROVED PROVIDER FOR UNIFORM DOMAIN NAME DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY V. DOMESTIC COURTS' RULINGS
arrowCONSTITUTIONAL SPEECH PROTECTION DOES NOT OUTWEIGH INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONCERNS
arrowTHE BAD FAITH OF A CYBERSQUATTER
arrowTHE BAD FAITH DETERMINATION OF COMPLAINANTS INVOLVING REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING
arrowTHE REGULATION OF THE USE OF GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES AS DOMAIN NAMES UNDER FRENCH LAW
arrowTRADEMARKS AND CYBERPIRACY PREVENTION: THE BAD FAITH REQUIREMENT
arrowARGENTINA: DOMAIN NAME AND TRADEMARK DISPUTES. TRADEMARKS OWNERS PRIVILEGED, EVEN ABSENT FINDING OF BAD FAITH IN THE DOMAIN NAME REGISTRANT. SHOULD NOT BE ADVISABLE TO ADOPT THE UDRP POLICY?
arrowCOMMERCIAL AGREEMENTS AND DOMAIN NAME DISPUTES
 Chapter 3: Domain Names & Third Party Liability
arrowTHE COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT OR THE FIRST AMENDMENT DO NOT IMMUNIZE AN INTERNET HOSTING COMPANY FROM BEING LIABLE UNDER THE LANHAM ACT FOR HOSTING THE WEBSITE OF A THIRD PARTY THAT ALLEGEDLY INFRINGED PLAINTIFF’S TRADEMARK
arrowA DOMAIN NAME REGISTRAR NOR A DOMAIN NAME AUCTION SITE IS LIABLE UNDER ACPA FOR INFRINGEMENT BY A THIRD PARTY
 Chapter 4: Domain Names & Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms
arrowDOMAIN NAME PROTECTION THROUGH ARBITRATION
arrowCHOOSING THE ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL AND ENFORCING THE ARBITRATION AWARD
arrowFORUM NON CONVENIENS ISSUES AFTER ARBITRATION AWARDS
arrowDISPUTE RESOLUTION RELATED TO DOMAIN NAMES REGISTERED UNDER .HU
 Supplemental Documents
arrowIndia: .in Domain Name launch
arrowDomain Name System
arrow'.eu' : High interest for Europe's new internet address
arrowWhat's Dot and What's Not: Domain Name Registration Scams
arrowThe Secondary Market for Domain Names
arrowThe .eu domain is welcomed with open arms…and some colorful names
arrowDirect Navigation Sites: A New E-Business Model Going Around Cyber-squatting Laws?
arrowHong Kong Online International Arbitration Center for E-commerce, domain names and other Internet related transactions
arrowSection 3006- Abuse Registration of personal names as domain names- of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act of 1999: just a good intent
arrowReserved Domain Names in the Italian Legislation
arrowThe State of Global Cybersquatting in 2007
arrowAntitrust Claims and the E-commerce Market- May Significant Mirror Hosting Agreements Typify an Antitrust Claim?
arrowTough New German Anti—Hacking Law Threatens 10 Years in Prison
arrowChina's Keyword Dispute Resolution Centre
arrowCybersquatters Threaten Consumers and Harm Businesses
arrowThe State of Global Cybersquatting in 2007
arrowLiability of Service Providers under the European Directive on Electronic Commerce
arrowAmendments to the .eu Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules
arrowHow Can I protect My Company’s Domain Name?
arrowHow to Register a Domain Name in Hong Kong
arrowIn Rem Jurisdiction in Anticybersquatting Cases: Good Solution against Foreign Cybersquatters
  
 

It is fair to say that a domain name is a business' name and address on the Internet.  Companies usually register a domain name similar or identical to their corporate name or protected trademark, or both; this facilitates their customers' search for the company.  Domain name disputes arise when two parties want the same domain name.  Often, this domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark.  Initially, these domain name-trademark disputes were solved by applying traditional domestic trademark laws.  Yet the globalization of the economy and the international exposure given by the Internet, triggered the enactment of international rules to solve domain name disputes between multi-jurisdictional parties.

ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is the international body that coordinates the use of domain names across the globe.  ICANN has also established specific rules and procedures to follow in case a domain name dispute arises; these are the so-called Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy- UDNDRP.   This unique eBook will introduce the reader, step-by-step, to the most relevant and basic information on domain names.  For instance, how are they protected, how common trademark principles apply to the protection of domain names, whether domain names are tangible property and able to be garnished, etc.  After this introduction of basic domain name topics, this eBook will provide examples of the most common domain name disputes and how they have been solved using the UDNDRP and other domestic laws. 

To conclude the topic of domain name and disputes, this eBook provides information on how the domain name arbitration process is conducted.  When a corporation or individual registers a domain name, by ICANN rule, they abide to submit disputes to arbitration.  The UDNDRP establishes the procedural rules for the arbitration process.  This process is conducted by ICANN- approved arbitration panels.  This eBook provides examples of some arbitration awards regarding domain name disputes, the basic rules to properly select the arbitration tribunal, and some information on what are the possible subsequent legal remedies after an arbitration award is rendered.   For instance, how to obtain enforcement or recognition of an arbitration award in domestic courts, what time does a party have to seek further legal readdress after an arbitration award, and how does the forum non conveniens apply when more than one jurisdiction is available for further legal and domestic readdress.     

  

 
CHAPTER 1: Introduction to Domain Name Generalities

 
arrowHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PROPOSES LEGISLATION THAT WOULD CRIMINALIZE FALSE DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION

A bill that criminalize users who knowingly provide false information when registering their domain name on the Internet was introduced in 2002 and is still pending. The Coble-Berman bill, H.R. 4640, was proposed to deal with providing false information when a domain name is being registered on the Internet. As to October 2006, the bill is still pending and was sent to the Department of Homeland Security for review.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowIN REM JURISDICTION NOT PERMITTED FOR ACTIONS INVOLVING THE FEDERAL TRADEMARK DILUTION ACT

This case stated that under the Federal Trademark Dilution Act, in rem jurisdiction is not permitted. The plaintiffs had permitted this action by in rem jurisdiction, because they could not obtain the identity and addresses of a number of the individuals or entities that had registered the domain names at issue and because it permitted them to bring one lawsuit in one jurisdiction against all 128 domain names, rather than multiple suits in jurisdictions scattered throughout the country. Even though it was a idealistic approach, the court determined that in rem jurisdiction was not permitted for actions under Federal Trademark Dilution Act. This case was filed and decided before the enactment of the U.S. Anticybersquatting Act. Yet, it is still good law in terms of the its teaching on jurisdiction under the Federal Trademark Dilusion Act.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowDOMAIN NAME REGISTRATIONS ARE A CONTRACT FOR SERVICES AND CANNOT BE GARNISHED

Domain name registrations are contracts for services and cannot be garnished. This holding was rendered by the Supreme Court of Virginia on April 21, 2000. Although this decision did have a strong dissent that agreed with the findings of the District Court that domain name registrations could be garnished, the Virginia Supreme Court held that contracts for services could not be subject to garnishment proceedings.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowDOMAIN NAME IS AN INTANGIBLE PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CONVERSION UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW

Is a domain name a form of property? Property is defined as "an abstract right or a legally-constructed relationship among people with respect to things" (Mechele Dickerson, From Jeans to Genes: The Evolving Nature of Property of the Estate). According to the experts, the term 'property' includes a bundle of rights, powers, privileges and immunities of a corporation or person regarding a specific source (thing or rights). United States ("US") case law has held that the term property is "employed to signify any valuable right or interest protected by law, and the subject matter or things in which rights or interest exist." Thus, contractual rights have been considered property according to US case law. Does this mean that a corporation's domain name contract with a registrar constitute intangible property? This article provides information on the US courts' approach to this question.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowDOMAIN NAMES AND DILUSION OF TRADEMARKS

The case of E. & J. Gallo Winery v. Spider Webs Ltd, considered the issue of dilution of a trademark through the use of domain names. In this case, plaintiff, a holder of a trademark, sued defendant under the Anti-Cyber Squatting Act and under Texas Anti-delusion and Trademark Law. The case was decided in 2002 and became one of the first cases in applying ("ACPA") together with state intellectual property laws. Cyber squatting of domain names will not be permitted and state and federal laws provide remedies to prevent this type of action that directly affect trademarks. Although the Internet permits the exercise of free speech, United States courts have been prompt to ban borderline exercise of free speech, especially when it infringes upon intellectual property rights.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowDOMAIN NAMES IN GERMANY

The Patent-und Markenamt is the German office in charge of trademark registration. The current trademark law in Germany entered into force on April 1999. It protects trademarks; commercial designations; and indications of geographical origin. There are three ways through which a trademark may obtain protection in Germany, (1) by registration of a sign as a trade mark in the Register kept at the Patent Office; (2) through the use of a sign in the course of trade insofar as the sign has acquired a secondary meaning as a trade mark within the affected trade circles; or, (3) by notoriety as a trade mark within the meaning of Article 6bis of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (Paris Convention). This article provides an overview of German trademark law, including its current position regarding trademark laws and its use in domain names.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowGENERIC TERMS IN DOMAIN NAMES (GERMANY)

In a spectacular judgment, the German Higher Regional Court in Hamburg decided in July 1999 that the use of generic terms as domain names is under certain circumstances anticompetitive and, thus, not permitted. The German Supreme Court had a different point of view and set aside the judgment. Currently, Germany allows the use of generic names as domain names. This practice is not considered in violation of Unfair Competition Law provided that some requirements are met. This summary illuminates the German legal position on that issue of generic terms as domain names.
More...


BACK TO TOP

  

 
CHAPTER 2: Domain Name Disputes

 
arrowDECISIONS BY ICANN APPROVED PROVIDER FOR UNIFORM DOMAIN NAME DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY V. DOMESTIC COURTS' RULINGS

Participants of domain name disputes find forum in both international arbitration process and their country's domestic courts. Additionally, domain name disputes may involve parties and laws from multiple jurisdictions. This summary offers information on the process followed by a domain name dispute that started by filing a complaint before ICANN and concluded by a federal court decision in the United States. The domain name involved was 'barcelona.com,' registered by a US corporation. Thus, the dispute obviously involved United States and Spanish law.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowCONSTITUTIONAL SPEECH PROTECTION DOES NOT OUTWEIGH INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONCERNS

In the United States, free speech arguments in trademark- related domain name disputes will not outweigh intellectual property rights in cyberspace. Violators of the US Consumer Protection Act will not be permitted to register domain names that infringe upon the trademarks of corporate entities even if they are being used to discuss popular speech.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowTHE BAD FAITH OF A CYBERSQUATTER

The bad faith of the cybersquatter is a crucial factor in determining whether or not someone should have rights to a domain name. "Cybersquatting" refers to the act of registering domain names in the hope of selling them back at a profit. Under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, bad faith can arise under a number of circumstances including when confusion is likely, when the complainant fails to disclose certain facts and when a domain name registrant has not used a domain name. These circumstances will be considered in determining whether the domain name should be returned to the complainant.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowTHE BAD FAITH DETERMINATION OF COMPLAINANTS INVOLVING REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING

Cybersquatting" refers to the act of registering domain names in the hope of selling them back at a profit. "Reverse domain name hijacking" has been a tactic that has become more used by a complainant in bad faith to attempt to deprive a registered domain-name holder of a domain name. ICAAN approved arbitration panels have determined these cases will not allow the bad faith of the complainant to be rewarded.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowTHE REGULATION OF THE USE OF GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES AS DOMAIN NAMES UNDER FRENCH LAW

The use of geographical names as domain names is a significant issue under French law. Abuses were committed by companies that registered as domain names certain geographical names already owned as a trademark by local authorities. As a result, several conflicts arose and the Courts clarified their position as to the use of geographical names as domain names.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowTRADEMARKS AND CYBERPIRACY PREVENTION: THE BAD FAITH REQUIREMENT

Before the enactment of the United States ("US") Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act of 1999 ("ACPA"), the US Federal Trademark Dilution Act was the legal basis for lawsuits on trademark infringement of domain names. Then, when ACPA was enacted, concretely Title III, Section (Lanham Act S. 43(d), or 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d)), a specific cause of action for trademark infringement in domain names emerged. Thus, a company or holder of trademark rights may file a lawsuit under ACPA against those who register their trademark as domain name, provided that certain statutory requirements are met. This summary explains the basic requirements of 15 USC § 1125(d), also called 'cyberpiracy prevention'.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowARGENTINA: DOMAIN NAME AND TRADEMARK DISPUTES. TRADEMARKS OWNERS PRIVILEGED, EVEN ABSENT FINDING OF BAD FAITH IN THE DOMAIN NAME REGISTRANT. SHOULD NOT BE ADVISABLE TO ADOPT THE UDRP POLICY?

Even when the dot.com bubble may have shattered, no doubt that the Internet is a powerful tool for companies seeking to communicate products and image to current and prospective customers. And still seems that the best way to have presence in the web is registering a domain name that is identical to the trademark or to the term by which the company is known. But while trademarks rights are held with respect to particular classes of goods and services, e-commerce has caused that similar, even identical, trademarks are registered with respect to different goods and services. Following is the Argentinean policy regarding domain names vs. trademarks.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowCOMMERCIAL AGREEMENTS AND DOMAIN NAME DISPUTES

Reverse domain name hijacking is the bad faith practice of those who file complaints against legitimate trademark and domain name owners to strip them of their genuine domain name. Victims of reverse domain name hijacking usually resort to WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center, an ICANN recognized arbitration provider for domain name disputes, to solve disputes that may involve both domestic and international parties. This article provides information on a recently decided WIPO case on reverse domain hacking.
More...


BACK TO TOP

  

 
CHAPTER 3: Domain Names & Third Party Liability

 
arrowTHE COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT OR THE FIRST AMENDMENT DO NOT IMMUNIZE AN INTERNET HOSTING COMPANY FROM BEING LIABLE UNDER THE LANHAM ACT FOR HOSTING THE WEBSITE OF A THIRD PARTY THAT ALLEGEDLY INFRINGED PLAINTIFF’S TRADEMARK

In Gucci America, Inc. v. Hall & Associates, a United States ("US") court determined that the Communications Decency Act ("CDA") and the First Amendment do not immunize an internet hosting company from being liable under the Lanham Act for hosting a third party’s website that allegedly infringes on a trademark. This case was revolutionary, because it determined that while an Internet hosting company could not be held liable for tort actions, they could be liable for trademark infringement.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowA DOMAIN NAME REGISTRAR NOR A DOMAIN NAME AUCTION SITE IS LIABLE UNDER ACPA FOR INFRINGEMENT BY A THIRD PARTY

The United States case of Bird v. Parsons, determined the potential liability of domain name auction sites and domain name registrars under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act ("ACPA") for the actions of third parties and the subsequent auction of the domain name that infringes upon a plaintiff’s trademark.
More...


BACK TO TOP

  

 
CHAPTER 4: Domain Names & Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms

 
arrowDOMAIN NAME PROTECTION THROUGH ARBITRATION

Arbitration is an alternative dispute resolution mechanism ("ADRM") used to solve domain name and any other legal disputes. Even though arbitration has been an established ADRM, the Internet has intensified its use due to the physical location of the parties and the high costs of litigation in foreign forums. In domain name disputes, arbitration determines who has the rights to a Domain Name through rules promulgated by ICANN for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution also referred to as UDRP. ICANN currently has four approved providers for dispute name resolutions. This article provides information on the issue of arbitration as alternative to domain name disputes.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowCHOOSING THE ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL AND ENFORCING THE ARBITRATION AWARD

Choosing the right arbitration tribunal is fundamental for those involved in domain name disputes. As Martin Hunter and Alan Redfern said in an edition of the International Commercial Arbitration: "Once a decision to refer a dispute to arbitration has been made, nothing is more important than choosing the right arbitral tribunal. It is a choice which is important not only for the parties to the particular dispute but also for the reputation and standing of the arbitral process itself. It is, above all, the quality of the arbitral tribunal that makes or breaks the process." This article provides basic information about an arbitration panel and the arbitration process.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowFORUM NON CONVENIENS ISSUES AFTER ARBITRATION AWARDS

When an individual or corporation registers a domain name, they consent to the Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy and mandatory arbitration. The following United States case determined the implications from consenting to this UDNRP policy and the search of forum/jurisdiction for post-arbitration award. The specific question is: can the losing party of an arbitration award search for a court forum for any post-award legal action? May the losing party choose between two country jurisdictions to seek further readdress of its legal claim? How does the forum non conveniens principle apply to these post-award legal proceedings? These questions will be answered in this article by presenting a United States case.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowDISPUTE RESOLUTION RELATED TO DOMAIN NAMES REGISTERED UNDER .HU

Upon registering a name within the Hungarian country code top-level domain .hu, applicants sign a declaration, by virtue of which they accept the authority of the Occasional Arbitration Court and the procedure for settling disputes established thereby. The court is supported by an independent body, the Science Association of the Council of Hungarian Internet Service Providers. The procedures are set out and published in the annex of the Hungarian Domain Registration Rules. They enter into the framework of the Hungarian Act LXXI/1994 on arbitration.
More...


BACK TO TOP

  

 
SUPPLEMENTAL DOCUMENTS:

 
arrowIndia: .in Domain Name launch


More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowDomain Name System


More...


BACK TO TOP

arrow'.eu' : High interest for Europe's new internet address


More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowWhat's Dot and What's Not: Domain Name Registration Scams


More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowThe Secondary Market for Domain Names


More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowThe .eu domain is welcomed with open arms…and some colorful names

European Union institutions are slated to switch the ending of their website addresses and e-mails to .eu on Europe Day (May 9, 2006) at a cost of about half a million euros, according to the European Commission, whose officials explain the change as a way to strengthen the EU brand
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowDirect Navigation Sites: A New E-Business Model Going Around Cyber-squatting Laws?

U.S. entrepreneurs just developed a new e-business model capable of generating millions of dollars in revenue by selling generic-sounding domain names. This is how it works; an e-commerce company creates, buys and stores thousands of domain names that are later offer as marketing platform to merchants dealing in goods described by those domain names. In other words, direct navigation sites are advertising links placed by major search engines.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowHong Kong Online International Arbitration Center for E-commerce, domain names and other Internet related transactions

Hong Kong International Arbitration Center (HKIAC) aims to be the leader among online dispute resolution forums for e-commerce and domain name controversies. HKIAC provides online dispute resolution services for the following cases: domain names disputes; registrar transfer disputes; internet keyword disputes; and e-commerce disputes.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowSection 3006- Abuse Registration of personal names as domain names- of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act of 1999: just a good intent

Cybersquatting is a term used to describe abusive registration of domain names. President Clinton signed the U.S. Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) in November 1999. Section 3006 of ACPA is called “Study on abusive domain name registrations involving personal names” and directs the Secretary of Commerce, together with the US Patent and Trademark Office and the Federal Election Commission, to revise and report to Congress suitable “guidelines and procedures for resolving the disputes involving the registration or use by a person of a domain name that includes the personal name of another person, in whole of in part, or a name confusingly similar thereto.”
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowReserved Domain Names in the Italian Legislation

According to Italian Law, in article 3.4 of the Rules of Assignation of Domain Names, some domain names are reserved, and so, they are not assignable or they are assignable only to predetermined subjects. The rules refer in particular to geographical names of regions, provinces, municipalities, and their two-letter abbreviations, including the translation of such names in English or other languages different from Italian. The rule appears quite unnecessary.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowThe State of Global Cybersquatting in 2007

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) reports Internet cybersquatting is exploding globally, up 25% in 2006 over the previous year, as even software colossus Microsoft's Bill Gates lost a symbolic case involving his Corbis images company, presided over by WIPO, as well. This article reports recent notable cases, trends in cybersquatting, and strategic developments being advanced against the issue Cyberquatting is the predicament of the Internet era. In 2006, 1,823 formal complaints were lodged over internet address disputes, the most since 2000, before the WIPO"s arbitration and mediation centre. Cybersquatting” is defined as "the abusive registration of trademarks as domain names.” The WIPO complained the domain name system itself was in danger of becoming a mere forum for “speculative gain” as cybersquatters have snapped up many choice addresses associated with top businesses, brands and other trophies in this intellectual property skirmish.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowAntitrust Claims and the E-commerce Market- May Significant Mirror Hosting Agreements Typify an Antitrust Claim?

As more brick-and-mortar companies enter the e-commerce market, we may witness how traditional antitrust and trade rules, like the United States (US) Sherman Act and the Clayton Act, apply to e-commerce dealings. Section 1 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C.S §1) declares illegal (it is a felony) any restrain of commerce or trade among the states, or foreign nations, through contractual arrangements, trusts, or the like. This provision applies to any 'person,' be it a corporation or an individual. The US Clayton Act (15 U.S.C.S. § 18) precludes any person from engaging in any form of trade that creates monopoly or lessen competition. Hence, an interesting question is this: may significant e-commerce agreements like Mirror Hosting Agreements between big companies trigger application of antitrust laws?
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowTough New German Anti—Hacking Law Threatens 10 Years in Prison

Hackers in Germany should be very careful to cover their tracks after the Bundestag passed a law in May 2007 that makes such computer activities a punishable crime. Even more eye-opening is the potential decade long sentence they could receive in prison. This legislation was proposed by the Government last year and meant to crack down on the spike in computer crimes and assaults in both the public and private sectors. This law also comes on top of a comprehensive penal code barring attacks on IT systems, and the new legislation is designed to cinch up any remaining loopholes. But Internet rights groups, civil libertarians and friendly hackers are all up in arms, as fear spreads that this new law will be used by the Government itself, ironically to justify hacking into private person's computers to examine the contents in the name of fighting terrorism.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowChina's Keyword Dispute Resolution Centre

Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre's (HKIAC) established the Internet Keyword Dispute resolution Centre. As its name infers, this arbitration centre solves Internet keyword disputes in China. Disputes are governed by China Internet Network Information Center- CNNIC- Internet Keyword Disputes Resolution Policy which sets the legal framework for these disputes. China's Internet keyword dispute process is totally written; parties must submit written arguments and documents to HKIAC via fax, e-mail, or post; in exceptional cases, hearings may be conducted. Following, you may find the legal text of the CNNIC Internet Keyword Dispute Resolution Policy.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowCybersquatters Threaten Consumers and Harm Businesses

INTA joins the fight against Internet practices that defraud consumers and target organizations conducting business online. The International Trademark Association (INTA) today issued a warning on behalf of its members to the public, alerting them to the growing threat of domain name cybersquatters who deliberately mislead consumers and defraud online businesses.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowThe State of Global Cybersquatting in 2007

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) reports Internet cybersquatting is exploding globally, up 25% in 2006 over the previous year, as even software colossus Microsoft's Bill Gates lost a symbolic case involving his Corbis images company, presided over by WIPO, as well. This article reports recent notable cases, trends in cybersquatting, and strategic developments being advanced against the issue
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowLiability of Service Providers under the European Directive on Electronic Commerce

Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council is the European Directive on Electronic Commerce ("the E-C Directive”). This Directive was issued on June 8th, 2000 with the objective of creating a “legal framework to ensure the free movement of information society services between Member States.” The E-C Directive expressly states that it does not intent to harmonize the field of criminal and taxation law among the Member States. It also clarifies that it does not cover any privacy or related issues encountered in e-commerce transactions; these are covered in other European Union directives. Thus, the E-C Directive merely establishes the European legal framework of communications in e-commerce transactions. As years pass, the precepts of this Directive gain relevance given the increase of companies offering telecommunication services, the augment of Internet Service Providers (“ISP”) and the use of the Internet to conduct commerce among the Member States. This article presents a summary of the most relevant parts of what is considered the legal framework of Service Providers in the European Union; their definition, liability, obligations, and benefits under European Union law.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowAmendments to the .eu Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules

Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms have proved to be an efficient tool to solve domain name disputes in the European Union which is continuously updating these mechanisms. Currently, there is a proposed amendment to the .eu Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR”) rules and their supplemental regulations. The amendment seeks to implement several changes to the existing ADR rules, including the inclusion of a speedy electronic-only ADR process. Comments on the proposal must be submitted before March 7th, 2008. This article informs on the main changes proposed by this new set of ADR rules.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowHow Can I protect My Company’s Domain Name?

Trademark based-Domain Names have become a precious corporate asset that both large and small companies are willing to protect against unauthorized use or abusive registration. Yet, protecting those domain names at an international level may prove costly and complicated. For these simple reasons the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ("ICANN”) wisely implemented two documents that have been crucial for companies engaged in protecting their domain names. The first document is the called “Dispute Resolution Policy” (“Dispute Policy”) and the second document is called “Rules for Uniform Domain Name Disputes Resolution Policy” (“Dispute Rules”). This article briefly explains these two international measures to solve domain name controversies.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowHow to Register a Domain Name in Hong Kong

Hong Kong Domain Name Registration Company Limited ("HK DNR”) is the Hong Kong's authority in charge of domain name registrations since 2001. HK DNR is under the control of the Hong Kong Internet Registration Corporation Limited which is the national registry and registrar for the registration and assignment of domain names in this country. Companies or individuals can register the following country top-level domain names: .COM.HK, .EDU.HK, .GOV.HK, .HK, .NET.HK, .ORG.HK in English and other Chinese domain names. This article provides start-up guidance on how to register these English domain names in Hong Kong.
More...


BACK TO TOP

arrowIn Rem Jurisdiction in Anticybersquatting Cases: Good Solution against Foreign Cybersquatters

A recent decision by the United States District Court for the District of Virginia held it had 'In Rem Jurisdiction' over domain name registrants that were located in a foreign country and had been accused of Cyber squatting in Virginia. Even though this was not a contested case and the plaintiff was granted summary judgment, this decision is a great precedent on the interpretation of the US Anti-cybersquatting Act and US Courts" jurisdiction on foreign cybersquatters. This article briefs the case of Atlas Copco v. AtlasCopcoiran.com, et all.
More...


BACK TO TOP

Back To Top Map trans

Home | About Us | Contact Us
Copyright ©2001-2011 Internet Business Law Services, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use