WIPO To Loosen Domain Names Transfer Standards

ethereal writes "According to Brian Livingston's column on C|Net, WIPO is considering some new rules which would make it easier for plaintiffs to get domain names which are '"geographical terms," individuals' personal names and "tradenames"'. The story also discusses how WIPO now gets the lion's share of the domain name disputes because they rule for the plaintiff the most often (surprise surprise) and have even transferred domains away from defendants who were acting in good faith (read: cybersquatting). WIPO is accepting comments on these new rules until Aug. 15."

Comments

Confusing article header

[Outland Traveller]

Not to be a nitpicking editor, but the slashdot writeup of this article is a bit confusing.

WIPO is considering some new rules which would make it easier for plaintiffs to get domain names which are '"geographical terms," individuals' personal names and "tradenames"'.

I think it would be clearer to say that WIPO is considering some new rules that force people to give up domain names which are geographical terms, individuals' personal names, and fall into the loosely defined catagory of "tradenames".

.... and have even transferred domains away from defendants who were acting in good faith (read: cybersquatting).

I think you mean to say that WIPO is forcing people to give up their domain names even when they are NOT cybersquatting.

The story also discusses how WIPO now gets the lion's share of the domain name disputes because they rule for the plaintiff the most often.

What the poster is trying to say is that people who bring domain disputes get to choose which organization hears their case. WIPO has a track record of finding for the defendent 84% of the time, much more than competing organizations, so they are the favoured choice of people bringing such suits.

I personally don't understand how this ludricrious idea of letting the plantiff pick the court ever got off the ground! What kind of f*cked up legal system works this way?!?

-OT

Commercialism is Evil[TM]

[AdamHaun]

A problem with using trademarks in domain name disputes:

IANAL, but IIRC(enough I's for ya?) trademarks only extend through one commercial domain. So, for example, I could start up a company called Ford's Musical Instruments, Inc. and not be breaking trademark law. However, an attempt to start up a Ford Car Company would result in a nasty lawsuit that I would most likely lose.

So who gets the domain name ford.com? Ford Motor Company? Ford Musical Instruments? Betty Ford? Joe Ford, the guy down the street? Why should the one with the most money have any intrinsic right to the name? The internet's not just about commerce for big corporations.

I feel that a decent way to address the problem is to actually hold register-ers to the purpose of the various top level domains. No more corporations in .edu, please! Maybe then other groups and people will be on an equal footing

Men with guns

[Morgaine]

WIPO has jurisdiction in exactly the same way as a mugger has jurisdiction over your wallet when he's pointing a gun at you.

The government, big business, the judicial system and law enforcement are basically all one big protection racket enforced at the point of a gun, and they dish out legal jurisdiction as suits them.

Moral jurisdiction is a different matter of course, but you have to pay lip service to the immoral but legal kind occasionally if you want to retain your freedom. I don't see it changing any time soon.