Abstract: The year 2009 marks the tenth anniversary of domain
name regulation under the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act
(ACPA) and the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP).
Adopted to combat cybersquatting, these rules left a confused picture of
domain name theory in their wake. Early cybersquatters registered
Internet domain names corresponding with others' trademarks to sell them
for a profit.
However, this practice was quickly and easily contained. New practices
arose in domain name markets, not initially contemplated by the drafters
of the ACPA and the UDRP. One example is clickfarming - using domain
names to generate revenues from click-on advertisements. To avoid
trademark liability, most clickfarmers and cybersquatters utilize
personal names, geographic and cultural indicators, and generic terms as
domain names. The application of current regulations to these practices
is unclear, largely because of the lack of a coherent policy basis for
domain name regulation.
This article develops a new model for domain name regulation. It
incorporates trademark policy within a broader theoretical framework
incorporating aspects of restitution and property theory. The author
suggests that a broader theoretical approach to domain name regulation
would facilitate the development of more coherent domain name rules in
the future. This discussion is particularly timely in light of the
forthcoming implementation of a new generic Top Level Domain (gTLD)
application process.
To download this paper from the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology
in full, see:
ssrn.com/abstract=1484763
- Follow us on :
