Domain Name Wire » wipo

Cheech and Chong Smoke Out Domain Name

Andrew Allemann — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:09:06 +0000

Domain owner: pack that in your pipe and smoke it!

Comedy duo Cheech & Chong have won rights to the CheechandChong.com domain name through arbitration at World Intellectual Property Organization.

Did you ever think you’d see “Cheech & Chong” and WIPO in the same sentence?

I first wrote about this story back in September, predicting that the comedians would win the case. But it wasn’t as clear cut as I originally thought. As it turns out, Cheech & Chong first objected to the use of the domain name in 2004. In 2006, possibly after smoking a joint, they felt peaceful and acquiesced, letting the domain owner use the domain.

But then the comedians reunited in 2008 for a tour and wanted the domain name. They couldn’t work out a deal with the owner, so they revoked any license to use their trademark in the domain name.

Cheech & Chong still won the dispute despite at one point agreeing to let the respondent use the domain. But it wasn’t as simple as it may have been.

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.

Cheech & Chong Try to Smoke Out Domain Name

Rate of Domain Cybersquatting Hits All Time Low

Andrew Allemann — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:19:27 +0000

Rate of cybersquatting continues decline.

The rate of cybersquatting, as measured by arbitration filings under Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy, has hit an all time low.

A Domain Name Wire analysis of UDRP filings dating back to 2000, the first year UDRP was widely used, showed marked declines. UDRP filings were compared to the total number of .com domain names in existence each year to calculate an effective rate of cybersquatting.

Although .com domain names make up only a subset of the domain universe, the majority of UDRP filings are related to .com domains.

The data shows that the rate of UDRP filings to the .com registration base has rapidly decreased from one per 7,000 domains in 2000 to about 1 in 20,000 domains in 2008. Preliminary to-date 2009 data shows the rate may slip further this year. Growth rate in UDRP cases has been outstripped by the growth rate in domain registrations every year that registrations have grown.

To calculate the total number of UDRPs filed, Domain Name Wire collected actual statistics available from WIPO, and added National Arbitration Forum and eResolution statistics from UDRPsearch. Data from Czech Arbitration Court, a new service, was not considered. UDRP data was compared to end-of-year .com registration data collected by Zooknic and DomainTools.

The graph below shows the rate of UDRP cases to the total .com registration base, using an inverted scale.

The decrease in rate of cybersquatting may be attributed to a number of factors, including greater knowledge and education about cybersquatting amongst the domain registrant community.

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.

Coming Soon: File a UDRP Domain Name Dispute for $250

Andrew Allemann — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:00:22 +0000

Arbitration provider wants to offer $250 expedited UDRPs.

[Update: The 250 fee is actually in Euros, and is the panelist's fee. CAC will also collect a 250 EUR fee, making the minimum fee 500 EUR]. Earlier this month I reported on WIPO’s plans to introduce a fast-track UDRP proceeding. It would cost less and be decided faster than traditional UDRPs. At the time, I predicted that WIPO’s competitors would follow suit because of venue shopping.

It looks like Czech Arbitration Court (CAC), a newer UDRP forum, is jumping on board. It plans to offer expedited hearings for only ~~$250~~500 EUR.

In order to qualify for an expedited hearing, the complainant must limit arguments to 2,000 words, and the respondent must not file a response.

A comment period is open until December 11. ICANN’s web site has an odd description of what CAC proposes, writing that it is “proposing to amend its Supplemental Rules to provide for an alternative page limit and processing fee for certain UDRP Complaints”.

That seems like a banal description for something that could fundamentally change UDRP and drastically increase the number of cases filed.

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.

After Winning Case, Man Hands Domain Name to Glenn Beck

Andrew Allemann — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 20:24:42 +0000

Man gives controversial domain name to Beck after proving a point.

Isaac Eiland-Hall just won a highly publicized case against Glenn Beck over the domain name glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com. As soon as he won, he did something surprising: he offered the domain name to Beck for free.

In a letter (pdf) to Beck, Eiland-Hall explained that he has met his objectives with the domain name and web site, and points out to Beck that bringing the case made things worse for Beck.

It bears observing that by bringing the WIPO complaint, you took what was merely one small critique meme, in a sea of internet memes, and turned it into a super-meme. Then, in pressing forward (by not withdrawing the complaint and instead filing additional briefs), you turned the super-meme into an object lesson in First Amendment principles.”

In explaining his reason for voluntarily handing over the domain, Eiland-Hall wrote:

“…I want to demonstrate to you that I had my lawyer fight this battle only to help preserve the First Amendment. Now that it is safe, at least from you (for the time being), I have no more use for the actual scrap of digital real estate you sought…

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.

WIPO to Offer Fast Track UDRP Without ICANN Approval?

Andrew Allemann — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:49:11 +0000

WIPO plans to make fast-track UDRP on its own.

Managing Intellectual Property published an article today saying World Intellectual Property Organization will offer a fast-track UDRP starting next year.

No, this is not the proposed “Uniform Rapid Suspension”. And, according to the article, WIPO says it can introduce this “Fast Track” without any interaction from ICANN.

How can WIPO do this? It plans to make changes to its supplemental UDRP rules. These are the rules that each arbitration provider adds to ICANN’s rules. The rule changes will be open to a 30 day comment period, according to the article.

It’s unclear exactly what will be different in fast track, other than getting a response back from the panel faster. But WIPO says it expects up to 50% of disputes to be handled under fast track and it will cost significantly less than the regular UDRP.

What is clear is that WIPO hopes to win over a lot of customers (i.e., complainants) with this new plan thanks to venue shopping. Complainants will like the lower fees, faster turnaround, and higher likelihood of success. That means National Arbitration Forum would have to follow suit or lose more customers to WIPO.

I have a call into WIPO and several domain attorneys to understand more about WIPO’s plans, and will update accordingly.

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.

Noss Calls Out WIPO at ICANN Meeting

Andrew Allemann — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:47:30 +0000

WIPO’s inconsistency called out at ICANN meeting.

Tucows CEO Elliot Noss seized an opportune moment to call out UDRP provider World Intellectual Property Organization during the first day of ICANN’s Seoul meetings.

During a session on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery, WIPO’s Eun-Joo Min commented that one of the problems with domain expiration is that registrars handle it inconsistently and in a non-transparent manner:

I think it is really important for the — not only for — especially for the registrants, but also for the general public to have some predictability about the life of that registration and not be subject to the whim of different registrars.

Anyone who reads some of WIPO’s panelist decisions in domain arbitration could flip that around on WIPO, and Noss did just that:

>>ELLIOT NOSS: Great. I find it ironic that comment is coming from WIPO. Having been a participant in a number of UDRP proceedings, there is an order of magnitude more transparency in registrars’ processes than there is in the UDRP process. In fact, we would see bordering on arbitrary decisions around time periods for submissions, the availability of submissions, things that would be found late an hour after a time period, things that would be allowed three weeks after a time period, and they all tended to go in a single direction.

So I would hope that WIPO could aspire to the level of transparency that registrars generally offer.

>>EUN-JOO MIN: Are published on the Internet.

>>ELLIOT NOSS: They’re published but not followed.

>>EUN-JOO MIN: They’re very transparent.

>>ELLIOT NOSS: And they say you may or may not allow extra time for submissions. You may or may not honor the time periods.

What’s frustrating to Noss and many domain owner is how WIPO and NAF arbitrators decide procedure inconsistently and are given the leeway to do so. Sometimes a response to a UDRP will be filed an hour late and the arbitrator will decide to consider it. Other times they don’t. Technically, complainants are only allowed to file a additional submission if the arbitrator asks for it, but this is rarely followed. When received, arbitrators usually take the additional submission into consideration; but sometimes they don’t. Even when they don’t, they usually note that “it didn’t add anything substantial”. This means they actually read the additional submission and considered it, but for the record they say they aren’t considering it.

So WIPO, here’s the message. Just publishing guidelines on your web site isn’t enough. You have to be consistent about them, and not favor the complainant. It’s like a registrar saying on its web site that you can usually renew your domain within a 30 day grace period, but giving some people only 10 days and others 50 days.

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.

Sony picks up Walkman.net. But will it do anything with it?

Andrew Allemann — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:43:44 +0000

Sony wins a Walkman domain name, but don’t count on a new web site any time soon.

Sony Corporation has been awarded the domain name Walkman.net in a domain arbitration case at World Intellectual Property Organization.

Sony invented the iconic Walkman in the late 70s. Walkman became somewhat of a generic term for portable music devices (similar to Scotch Tape for clear tape) until MP3 players went mainstream this decade. Sony still uses the brand for its portable audio devices.

So is Sony looking to launch a Walkman-specific web site? Don’t hold your breath. In 2000, the company won the domain name Walkman.COM through arbitration. To date, that web site has merely displayed an “under construction” page.

Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.