DOMAIN NAMES Registrant’s rights
Te registrant can demonstrate rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name by establishing that:
• his use of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name is in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services;
• he (as an individual, business, or other organisation) has been commonly known by the domain name, even if he has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or
• he is making a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.
Registrar’s involvement in dispute resolution
It is interesting to note that the .IN Registry and the registrars are not allowed to participate in the domain name dispute resolution proceedings in any capacity other than providing the information relevant to the registration and use
Figure 2: Comparison of Total no. of Disputes vs Decisions in favour of trademark holders
10 20 30 40 50 60
0 2006 2007 * Up to Aug 3, 2011 Data Source: Dispute case decisions available on .IN Registry’s website
of the domain name upon the request of the arbitrator. Te registry and the registrar are not liable for any decisions rendered by an arbitrator.
Te remedies available to the complainant include the cancellation of the registrant’s domain name or the transfer of domain name registration to the complainant. Costs, if deemed fit, may also be awarded by the arbitrator.
Te registrant is prohibited from transferring the domain name registration to another holder aſter an arbitration proceeding is initiated for a period of 15 working days aſter it is concluded or during a pending court proceeding or arbitration commenced regarding the domain name, unless the party to whom the domain name registration is being transferred agrees, in writing, to be bound by the decision of the court or arbitrator.
Conclusion and suggestions
Lucy Rana enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi (2007) and also holds an executive diploma in international business management with a specialisation in foreign trade, from the Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, New Delhi (2004). She read law at the University of Delhi and has majored in Japanese from Jawahar Lal Nehru University, New Delhi. Rana has been advising many Fortune 500 companies and some of the world’s most esteemed corporations from multifarious fields, on a range of contentious and non- contentious IP matters. She regularly conducts due diligence with an emphasis on IP-related issues and leads the firm’s IP enforcement, watch and domain name dispute resolution teams.
It is a fact that .INDRP serves an important and crucial role to resolve domain name disputes in out-of-court proceedings. A key advantage of the .INDRP procedure is the mandatory implementation of the resulting decisions. Te process is quite transparent as the .IN Registry posts all disputed domain names, case status, case statistics and full text of decisions on its website. Te process is fair and effective and trademark owners have prevailed in majority of the decisions. Some of the domain names that have been transferred following .INDRP referrals are
www.pizzahut.in,
www.gmail.co.in,
www.nescafe.co.in , and
www.starbucks.co.in. n
Lucy Rana is an IP attorney at SS Rana & Co. She can be contacted at:
lucy@ssrana.com
Rishu Srivastava is a patent agent at SS Rana & Co. She can be contacted at:
rishu@ssrana.in
54 World Intellectual Property Review November/December 2011
Rishu Srivastava holds an engineering degree and specialises in biotechnology and life sciences. She was selected as Women Scientist specialising in IPR by the Technology Information Forecasting and Assessment Council. She also interned with SS Rana & Co and later secured first rank in the Patent Agent Examination conducted by the Controller General of Patent, Design and Trademark, Government of India. She is proficient in all aspects of patent and design work including patent draſting, prosecution before the Indian Patent Office, analysing patent and design applications and providing opinions related to patentability and infringement suits. She regularly advises clients on IP strategy and portfolio management.
2008 2009 2010 2011*
Decisions in favour of trademark holders
Total No. of domain name disputes settled by .INDRP
www.worldipreview.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100