In the past, many of the essential technical coordination functions of the Internet were handled on an ad hoc basis by the U.S. government, its contractors and volunteers. This informal structure represented the spirit of the Internet community. However, the growing international importance of the Internet has necessitated the creation of a technical management and policy development body that is both more formalized in structure, more accountable, and more fully reflective of the diversity of the world's Internet communities. Specifically, ICANN is assuming responsibility to coordinate the stable operation of the Internet in four key areas:
1. Domain Name System (DNS);
2. allocation of IP address space;
3. management of the root server system;
4. coordination of protocol number assignment.
ICANN's mandate is not to "run the Internet." Rather, it is to coordinate the management of only those specific technical, managerial and policy development tasks that require central coordination - the assignment of globally unique names, addresses, and protocol parameters
Formed in November 1998 in response to a june 1998 White Paper, issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce and situated in Los Angeles, California, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a non-profit, private sector corporation that coordinates a select set of the Internet's technical management functions currently performed by the U.S. Government or its contractors and volunteers. Between now and September 2000, ICANN will be gradually assuming responsibility for coordinating the assignment of protocol parameters, the management of the domain name system, the allocation of IP address space, and the management of the root server system.
ICANN is a technical cordination body for the Internet, which is dedicated to preserve the operational stability of the Internet. ICANN is now managed by a initial board of directors. After the start-up phase the elections in early november 2000 the the board will consist of 19 directors (9 of them chosen by the individual members of ICANN, 3 of them elected by the Domain Name Supporting Organization (DNSO), the Address Supporting Organization (ASO) and the Protocol Supporting Organization (PSO) and 1 is the President and CEO of ICANN).
Further the ICANN Board has established four Advisory Committees.
ICANN will be and is already now a global, non-profit, consensus-driven Organization.
UDRP
In response to the calls for effective mechanisms to resolve domain name disputes, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) approved the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) and an accompanying rules of procedure (Rules) on Oct. 24, 1999.
The UDRP was adopted for registrars in the ".com," ".net," and ".org" generic top level domains (gTLDs). On the other hand, domain name disputes in the country code top level domains (ccTLDs) such as the "at" domain in Austria, are not subject to the UDRP, although they are encouraged to adopt the policy in full. Therefore, disputes over "name.com" falls within the UDRP while those over "name.co.at" or "name.at" do not.
Under the policy, domain name disputes are submitted to an ICANN-accredited dispute resolution provider. The first entity accredited by ICANN was the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) which also played a key role in the formulation of the UDRP.
Thousands of domain name disputes have been filed pursuant to the UDRP. The principal advantage of the UDRP and the reason behind its success is the speed by which the cases are resolved - typically 30 to 45 days from the filing of the complaint. While not all domain name disputes fall within UDRP, it certainly covers the most cases of cybersquatting.
To qualify for resolution under the UDRP, the following elements of a domain name dispute must be present:
1.) The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights.
2.) The respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name.
3.) The domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
The critical element, of course, is bad faith-instances of which are enumerated in the UDRP itself. These include situations where the respondent registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling the same to the owner of the mark for valuable consideration (a classic modus operandi of a cybersquatter). Other cases of bad faith involve disrupting the business of a competitor or attracting Internet users to the respondent's website by creating a confusion arising from the use of the complainant's mark as the domain name.
While the UDRP is not an end-all and be-all solution for all domain name disputes, it does provide a venue for the swift and inexpensive resolution of cybersquatting cases.
Mag. Leopold Habsburg-Lothringen,
Associate at Sattler & Schanda, Rechtsanwälte
http://www.sattler.co.at
Get free hosting and email at Whoix.net!
Copyright © 2002 Whoix?
All rights reserved.
![[new]](images/new.gif){kind=small}
Register them Online.