browse comments: WIPO RFC-2

WIPO RFC-2
annrobins@efpia.org
Tue, 3 Nov 1998 12:19:18 -0500

Browse by: [ date ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: tm@itma.org.uk: "WIPO RFC-2"
Previous message: Alastair Breward: "WIPO RFC-2"

Dear Madam,
Dear Sir,

The European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) vividly supports the efforts of WIPO regarding the Internet Domain Name Process and Trademarks and welcomes the open debate surrounding this process. In this context, we participated in the regional hearing which was held in Brussels on 29 September 1998.

Our comments focus mainly on the area of Dispute Resolution.

Although we recognise the need to provide a reliable mechanism for resolving disputes surrounding ownership of domain names in a forum that is accessible to all interested parties, we are concerned that to compel parties to submit to a private panel with final decisive authority may deprive trademark owners of important legal and procedural protections afforded by access to national court systems. In the interest of fostering expeditious resolution of disputes in a cost effective manner, we support the use of voluntary mediation. As it can often be difficult to distinguish cases of cyberpiracy from disputes over competing bona fide claims to a domain name, we propose that such mediation should be available for all domain name disputes.

Further, as mediation is voluntary and does not preclude access to national courts, we recommend that the remedies available through mediation be limited to disposition of the relevant domain name. Any additional remedies are best left to the jurisdiction of relevant courts. This would enable parties who are facing cases of misconduct calling for special remedies to bypass the mediation process and address the disposition of the relevant domain name in the context of litigation over the relevant conduct.

Finally, in addition to mediation, we are in favour of the suspension of a domain name registration in the case where a challenger can provide evidence of ownership of a registered trade mark, to prevent continuing harm to the trade mark owner during a dispute and to mitigate the damages of the other party.

We had intended to reply by 2nd November 1998 as requested and we are apologize for our delay. We hope nevertheless that these comments will be helpfull

 -- Posted automatically from Process Web site