SPRING 2006 |
Cyberlaw |
Course No.: 9200-710-001 Course ID: 17105 |
Tu, Th 4:45 - 6:15 p.m. |
Room W-206 |
|
| Professor Jay Dratler, Jr. | Room 231D (IP Alcove) |
(330) 972-7972 |
dratler@uakron.edu, dratler@neo.rr.com |
| Copyright © 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 Jay Dratler, Jr. | |||
| For permission, see CMI. |
|
Questions and Notes on the ICANN Arbitration Regime
2. How does the Policy define cybersquatting? What elements and factors, if any, does its definition have in common with the definition of cybersquatting under Lanham Act § 43(a)? What elements and factors are different? What relief is available to the cybersquatting plaintiff or complainant under each regime? On the same facts, would you rather be a plaintiff in a federal cybersquatting case under Lanham Act § 43(d) or a complainant in a domain-name arbitration under ICANN's Policy and Rules? a defendant? why, and under what circumstances? 3. Both the Policy and the Rules are required to be incorporated
by reference into every contract for registration of a domain name issued
by any domain-name registrar, including NSI (which is still in business,
although now with competition). Both documents are also incorporated
by reference into the contracts that ICANN has with the various domain-name
registrars, from which the registrars derive their authority to register
and manage domain names. Thus the Policy and Rules take effect by
virtue of private contract and by virtue of the various registrars' power
and contractual obligation to cancel or transfer domain-name registrations
in accordance with their terms. Although the Policy and Rules are
matters of neither national nor international law, do they have the same
effect? The WIPO Website also helps answer the question "who usually wins domain-name arbitrations?" Take a look at the Cumulative Case Statistics. |