|
This is the part of the ICANN Web site that records the organization's ongoing efforts to resolve disputes over domain names -- the confrontations that arise when two competing groups want the same Web-site address. Here, on the DNDR page, you will see the world's maiden attempt to devise a legal system that can cope with disputes on the global Internet. Last December, ICANN established a formal arbitration process to resolve name disputes in the popular .com, .net, and .org domains. In the nearly 10 months since, more than 1,800 legal proceedings have been initiated involving companies, educational institutions, nonprofits, and private individuals from around the world. The DNDR page (www.icann.org/udrp/udrp.htm) lists every case and every decision, making it the functional equivalent of an online law library. How is the system working so far? Well, there's no doubt that it's fast. So far, more than 1,100 decisions have been rendered. It's also fairly cheap. It costs about $1,000 to initiate a domain-name proceeding. The arbitrators are provided by four private, alternative dispute-resolution groups: the World Intellectual Property Organization, the National Arbitration Forum, Disputes.org/eResolution consortium, and the CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution. MIXED BAG. Are the rulings just? That is a tougher question. "The decisions are a mixed bag. You see some good ones and some bad ones," says Jamie Love, of the Consumer Project for Technology in Washington, D.C., which has set up a Web site that's monitoring the domain-name dispute-resolution process and critiquing some individual decisions (www.cptech.org/ecom/icann/domaindisputes/domaindisputes.html). One fear that has been expressed by Love and others is that over time, the system will favor plaintiffs. Because plaintiffs pay for the dispute-resolution provider, there would seem to be a financial incentive for the providers to gain a reputation for siding with them. It's worth noting that as of Sept. 26, plaintiffs had prevailed in 880 out of 1140 cases. Another concern is that the decisions are sometimes inconsistent. In some cases, for example, arbitrators have allowed the person or institution holding a .com name to evict the owner of an identical .net domain because of the "likelihood of confusion." In other instances, arbitrators have rejected this theory. A big reason: the fact that there is no established body of precedent to guide decisions. "I assume that there was inconsistency in the early days of the English Common Law as well," says David Post, a Temple University law professor who is a partner in the Disputes.org/eResolution consortium. He also is one of the co-founders of www.icannwatch.org, which has been monitoring domain-name dispute-resolution proceedings. The domain-name arbitration process will certainly evolve. ICANN plans to review its experiment later this year and make modifications if necessary. New domains with their own rules -- such as .union or .shop -- may be adopted. But the lessons that are being learned today on the DNDR page are likely to shape the Internet's legal system for years to come. France covers Legal Affairs for Business Week in New York. Have a question or a comment? Let him know at mike_france@ebiz.businessweek.com. |
