It calls upon the international community to decide whether to address these insufficiencies and establish a complete legal basis for dealing with offensive on-line practices in connection with the naming systems.
WIPO’s current Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) has been applied, since December 1999, in resolving thousands of conflicts relating to cybersquatting on the internet.
A group including representatives of the governments of the EU, the US and Australia, has called for a review of the rules.
In response, WIPO’s new study addresses the abusive domain name registrations of:
- International Non-proprietary Names (INNs) for pharmaceutical substances;
- names and acronyms of international intergovernmental organisations (IGOs);
- personal names;
- geographical identifiers, notably, indications of geographical source used on goods, geographical indications and other geographical terms;
- trade names.
WIPO’s report recommends the following:-
- INNs: a simple mechanism should be established to protect against identical domain name registrations. This administrative system would operate when any interested party notified WIPO that a domain name registration is identical to an INN. WIPO, in conjunction with the World Health Organisation, would verify this fact and notify ICANN and, in turn, the applicable registrar, that the domain name registration should be cancelled.
- IGOs: states, as the constituent members of IGOs, should work towards establishing an administrative dispute-resolution procedure, similar to the UDRP.
- Personal names (in particular, names of individuals who are targets of abusive registration because they are distinguished or famous): the international community needs to decide whether to work towards some means of protection for personal names in the domain name space.
- Geographical indications: WIPO states that the international framework in this area needs to be further advanced before an adequate solution is available in the domain name space.
- Trade names: It is not recommended that action be taken in the area because, although international norms exist for their protection, fundamental problems remain in identifying what can be protected as a “trade name” across different countries and, as with geographical indications, complex choices would need to be made on applicable law in a global medium.
The recommendations contained within the report will now be presented to WIPO member states and the internet community, including the ICANN.