A study of the international rules for deciding most domain name
disputes has concluded that they are fair and free of major flaws.
However, it has also identified some ambiguities in the rules which
need clarification.
Of 700 UDRP cases studied by the Max Planck Institute for
Foreign and Informational Patent, Copyright and Competition Law,
76% resulted in transfers of domain names from their owners to
those bringing the claims. In 21% of cases, the domain name owners
prevailed. This was not considered a flaw in the system – it is to
be expected that cases will only be brought if the party paying the
fee has an expectation of success.
The Institute's report identified some ambiguities in the UDRP.
In particular, it has called for clarification of the conditions
under which a domain name is found to be "confusingly similar" to a
trade mark; the measures to be taken to safeguard the interests of
free speech; and the rules concerning the burden of proof and the
standards to be applied in the assessment of the parties'
contentions. It has also asked for an investigation into the
possibility of setting up an appeals system. At present, appeals
must be taken to courts.
