[ga] FYI: Final WIPO-2 Report released

[Alexander Svensson <alexander@svensson.de>]

Final Report of the Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process
http://wipo2.wipo.int/process2/report/index.html

WIPO does not recommend UDRP expansion into personal names,
geographical identifiers and trade names, but recommends
a UDRP-like mechanism for names and acronyms of intergovernmental
organizations (IGOs) and a cancellation (!) mechanism for
International Nonproprietary Names (INNs) for pharmaceutical
substances.

Excerpts from the Executive Summary:

 (i) For INNs, which are examined in Chapter Three of the
 Report, it is recommended that a simple mechanism be
 established which would protect INNs against identical
 domain name registrations. The mechanism would allow any
 interested party to notify WIPO that a domain name
 registration is identical to an INN, whereupon WIPO would,
 in conjunction with the World Health Organization (WHO),
 verify the exact similarity between the domain name and
 the INN and notify this to ICANN, which would, in turn,
 notify the registrar with which the registration was made
 that the domain name registration should be cancelled.

 (ii) For the names and acronyms of IGOs, which are examined
 in Chapter Four of the Report, it is recommended that States,
 as the constituents of IGOs, should work towards the
 establishment of an administrative dispute-resolution procedure,
 akin to the UDRP, where an IGO could bring a complaint that a
 domain name was the same or confusingly similar to the name or
 acronym of the IGO, that it has been registered without legal
 justification and that it likely to create a misleading
 association between the holder of the domain name registration
 and the IGO in question.

 (iii) For personal names, which are the subject of Chapter Five
 of the Report, it was found that there no existing international
 norms dealing with their protection and that national legal
 systems provide for a wide diversity of legal approaches to their
 protection. The sensitivities offended by the registration of
 personal names as domain names by parties unconnected with the
 persons in question is recognized, and it is suggested that the
 international community needs to decide whether it wishes to work
 towards some means of protection of personal names against abuse
 of domain name registrations.

 (iv) For geographical identifiers, which are dealt with in Chapter
 Six, it is recognized that certain norms exist at the international
 level which prohibit false and deceptive indications of geographical
 source on goods and which protect geographical indications, or the
 names of geographical localities with which goods having particular
 characteristics derived from that locality are associated. However,
 these rules apply to trade in goods and may require some adaptation
 to deal with the perceived range of problems with the misuse of
 geographical indications in the DNS. Furthermore, the lack of an
 international agreed list of geographical indications would pose
 significant problems for the application of the UDRP in this area
 because of the need to make difficult choices of applicable law.
 It is suggested that the international framework in this area needs
 to be further advanced before an adequate solution is available to
 the misuse of geographical indications in the DNS. As far as other
 geographical terms are concerned, the Report produces considerable
 evidence of the widespread registration of the names of countries,
 places within countries and indigenous peoples as domain names by
 persons unassociated with the countries, places or peoples. However,
 these areas are not covered by existing international laws and a
 decision needs to be taken as to whether such laws ought to be developed.

 (v) For trade names, which are the subject of Chapter Seven, the
 situation is similar to that of geographical indications, insofar as
 certain international norms exist for the protection of trade names,
 but fundamental problems exist in identifying across differing
 national approaches what constitutes a protectable trade name, and
 consequently, in avoiding highly complex choices of applicable law
 on a global medium. It is recommended that no action be taken in
 this area.

Best regards,
/// Alexander
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html