- Joined
- Jun 6, 2002
- Messages
- 2,234
- Reaction score
- 2
http://www.demys.net/news/2003/05/28_co.htm
(looks like there is a catch---No pre-existing (key point) Country names are subject to dispute---boy that raises the value on them!!! Oh.. And do you get the feeling important people SURF DNF? We were just discussing this subject)
EXISTING COUNTRY DOMAINS NOT SUBJECT TO NEW DISPUTE POLICY
28th May, 2003
The World Intellectual Property Organization has determined its position on 'retrospectively registered' geographic domain names, making it more likely that existing registrants of domains such as 'southafrica.com' can keep hold of them.
Demys.net originally reported on the deliberations of the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Industrial Designs (SCT) in October last year (see: WIPO to ask for UDRP modification) when a position on geographic names had not been finalised. Since then, the SCT met in November 2002 and adopted a decision that the short and long names of States, as set out in the United Nations Terminology Bulletin, should be protected against identical and misleadingly similar registrations as domain names by persons unconnected with the constitutional authorities of the States concerned. The SCT recommended that this protection should be implemented through an amendment of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) and should apply to all future registrations of domain names in the gTLDs.
Francis Gurry, Assistant Director General and Legal Counsel for WIPO wrote to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN), the body responsible for the UDRP, in February this year to transmit this decision. As yet, no changes have been made to the Policy. In the meantime, however, domain name analysts have been watching for the final deliberation of the WIPO's SCT as this would determine whether countries would be allowed to make complaints regarding geographic domain names already registered by third parties, such as those in the recent cases involving New Zealand, on which Demys reported (see: Newzealand.com purchase "shocker" ; HM the Queen wins domain dispute and HM The Queen found guilty of reverse domain name hijacking).
The SCT met to deal with this question earlier this month. The meeting was attended by delegations from 79 member States, 3 intergovernmental organizations and 12 non-governmental organizations. According to WIPO, the decision was reached that the protection of country names should not be retrospective, although no reasoning or other details of the deliberations have been put forward. It appears that WIPO has not yet communicated this decision to ICANN.
The consequences of the SCT decision are considerable. All existing registrants of country names in the domain space would appear to be safe from a 'new' UDRP complaint which might be raised by the government of the country concerned when the changes are implemented. For example, Virtual Countries Inc., registrant of SouthAfrica.com, will be greatly relieved that a further avenue of attack has been denied to the South African government, who continue to argue that a sovereign state should have the right to hold its own name in the Domain Name System.
The SCT continues to discuss whether 'unofficial' names by which countries are known should have protection under the UDRP and Demys.net will bring you the results of their deliberations when they are known.
(looks like there is a catch---No pre-existing (key point) Country names are subject to dispute---boy that raises the value on them!!! Oh.. And do you get the feeling important people SURF DNF? We were just discussing this subject)
EXISTING COUNTRY DOMAINS NOT SUBJECT TO NEW DISPUTE POLICY
28th May, 2003
The World Intellectual Property Organization has determined its position on 'retrospectively registered' geographic domain names, making it more likely that existing registrants of domains such as 'southafrica.com' can keep hold of them.
Demys.net originally reported on the deliberations of the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Industrial Designs (SCT) in October last year (see: WIPO to ask for UDRP modification) when a position on geographic names had not been finalised. Since then, the SCT met in November 2002 and adopted a decision that the short and long names of States, as set out in the United Nations Terminology Bulletin, should be protected against identical and misleadingly similar registrations as domain names by persons unconnected with the constitutional authorities of the States concerned. The SCT recommended that this protection should be implemented through an amendment of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) and should apply to all future registrations of domain names in the gTLDs.
Francis Gurry, Assistant Director General and Legal Counsel for WIPO wrote to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN), the body responsible for the UDRP, in February this year to transmit this decision. As yet, no changes have been made to the Policy. In the meantime, however, domain name analysts have been watching for the final deliberation of the WIPO's SCT as this would determine whether countries would be allowed to make complaints regarding geographic domain names already registered by third parties, such as those in the recent cases involving New Zealand, on which Demys reported (see: Newzealand.com purchase "shocker" ; HM the Queen wins domain dispute and HM The Queen found guilty of reverse domain name hijacking).
The SCT met to deal with this question earlier this month. The meeting was attended by delegations from 79 member States, 3 intergovernmental organizations and 12 non-governmental organizations. According to WIPO, the decision was reached that the protection of country names should not be retrospective, although no reasoning or other details of the deliberations have been put forward. It appears that WIPO has not yet communicated this decision to ICANN.
The consequences of the SCT decision are considerable. All existing registrants of country names in the domain space would appear to be safe from a 'new' UDRP complaint which might be raised by the government of the country concerned when the changes are implemented. For example, Virtual Countries Inc., registrant of SouthAfrica.com, will be greatly relieved that a further avenue of attack has been denied to the South African government, who continue to argue that a sovereign state should have the right to hold its own name in the Domain Name System.
The SCT continues to discuss whether 'unofficial' names by which countries are known should have protection under the UDRP and Demys.net will bring you the results of their deliberations when they are known.
