WIPO Caseload Summary
IP Disputes referred to WIPO Mediation, Arbitration, Expert Determination, Good Offices and
Co-administration Procedures
The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (WIPO AMC) has been involved in the resolution of over 2,800 intellectual property (IP), innovation, and technology disputes referred to WIPO Mediation, Arbitration, Expedited Arbitration, Expert Determination, and Good Offices, as well as co-administration schemes with national IP and Copyright Offices and Courts and other institutions. As the table covering the period 2014-2023 shows, most of these cases were filed in recent years.
Types of Disputes
Disputes referred to the WIPO AMC were based on contract clauses and submission agreements concluded after a dispute had arisen (some of these followed WIPO Good Offices, including disputes pending before national IP and Copyright Offices and Courts):
- licensing agreements (e.g., trademarks, copyright, software, patents - including SEPs/FRAND, life sciences)
- research and development agreements
- technology transfer agreements
- distribution agreements, franchising agreements
- Information Technology agreements
- data processing agreements
- joint venture agreements
- consultancy agreements
- art marketing agreements
- digital copyright
- IP infringement
- TV distribution and formats
- film production
- copyright collective management
- cases arising out of agreements in settlement of prior court litigation
Parties
Parties to disputes referred to the WIPO AMC include large-sized companies, SMEs and startups across industries and sectors, artists and inventors, collective management organizations, R&D centers, and universities.
The WIPO AMC has assisted parties from all regions in the resolution of IP, innovation and technology disputes.
Case Examples
The WIPO AMC makes available a number of anonymized mediation and arbitration case examples.
Remedies
Amounts claimed in disputes referred to the WIPO AMC have varied, ranging from disputes where no claims for a monetary amount are indicated or the dispute concerns issues that are not quantifiable in monetary terms, to disputes involving amounts up to 1 billion.
The remedies claimed in have included: damages, infringement declarations and specific performance, such as a declaration of non-performance of contractual obligations, or of infringement of rights, further safeguards for the preservation of confidentiality of evidence, the provision of a security, the production of data, the delivery of goods and the conclusion of new contracts (including determination of licensing terms).
Settlement Rates
The WIPO AMC seeks to create positive opportunities for party settlement. To date, 70% of WIPO mediation and 33% of WIPO arbitration cases have concluded in a settlement between the parties.
Domain Name Administrative Dispute Resolution Procedures
The WIPO AMC has administered over 67,000 cases under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) and related policies. Together, these proceedings have involved parties from 185 countries and over 120,000 Internet domain names. The WIPO AMC provides a full range of statistics concerning WIPO domain name cases (e.g., case outcomes and languages, complainant industries, and geographical distribution of parties) on its website. Impact of Changes to Availability of WhoIs Data on the UDRP and the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition are also available online.
The UDRP applies primarily to international domains such as .com, .net, .org, .top, .win and .xyz. In addition, over 80 country code top-level domains (ccTLDs) have appointed the WIPO AMC as service provider for managing domain name disputes in their respective ccTLD. The WIPO AMC has published a Guide to WIPO’s services for country code top-level domain registries.