About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

Progress is Made in WIPO's InternationalInternet Domain Name Consultations

Geneva, November 27, 1998
Press Updates UPD/1998/43

The first round of global consultations under the WIPO Internet Domain Name Process (DNS), has now been completed. During the months of September, October and November, 1998, WIPO officials and the Panel of International Experts appointed to assist WIPO in this activity, held meetings in eleven countries in Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America and North America. These open discussions were attended by participants from government, business, legal and public interest circles, Internet technologists, and private individuals. The fruitful exchange of views which characterized these consultations was informed by the wide and varied experience of participants in using and administering the domain name system. This system currently includes more than 200 country-code domain name registrars.

The Objectives:

WIPO's task in undertaking these broad-based consultations is to develop recommendations, on the basis of international consensus, for the reform of intellectual property law and practice in relation to Internet Domain Names. In accordance with WIPO's mandate in this regard, the consultations were conducted with a view to:

  1. developing procedures to prevent disputes involving trademarks and domain names, as well as to develop uniform ways to resolve disputes that do occur;
  2. assessing whether there is a need to give special protection to famous and well-known trademarks on the Internet; and
  3. evaluating the potential effects on existing intellectual property rights of adding new generic top-level domains.

The Outcome of Discussions:

A common thread to discussions was the desire for harmonization of international practices throughout the domain name system. Broad interest was also expressed in the development of new alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to supplement traditional litigation. Such mechanisms might include the creation of administrative dispute resolution panels to specifically address domain name issues. These face-to-face discussions have been complemented by parallel consultations undertaken via a dedicated WIPO interactive web site (http://wipo2.wipo.int). To date, WIPO has received more than 320 written comments and oral presentations on intellectual property related aspects of this subject.

The initial findings derived from this first phase of the WIPO Domain Name consultations will be presented as draft recommendations in an Interim Report to be published in mid-December.

A Second Series of Consultations:

In January and February of next year, a second series of meetings will be held in Toronto, Singapore, Sao Paolo, Dakar, Brussels and Washington. These consultations will serve as the basis for WIPO's final recommendations to be submitted to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) in March 1999. ICANN is the Corporation which has recently been established to manage the Internet Domain Name System.

The Domain Name System Debate and WIPO:

Over the last two and a half years, the management of the Internet Domain Name System has been the subject of intensive worldwide debate. The emergence of the Internet as a global public communications network and the explosion in Internet traffic has underlined the importance of ensuring that the domain name system is managed in a stable, competitive and open manner which takes into account the interest of all Internet stakeholders.

WIPO's involvement in these debates stems, in particular, from the growing number of conflicts between Internet domain names and trademarks. Domain names were originally intended to perform the function of connecting computers through the Internet. Internet domain names, such as wipo.int, are the human-friendly form of Internet Protocol addresses. These addresses are used to route traffic between the computers and computer networks which make up the Internet. The domain name system forms the skeleton of the Internet, allowing computer sites to be accessed through their domain names, via a system of generic top-level domains ("g-TLDs"), such as .com, .org, and .net, and country-code top-level domains ("cc-TLDs"), such as .uk (for the United Kingdom) and .za (for South Africa). As domain names are easy to remember, they now are being used to advertise and help consumers locate companies doing business on the Internet. It is this simple and efficient system which has spurred and supported the remarkable expansion of global electronic commerce.

The Nature of the Problem:

Conflicts between domain names and trademarks largely occur because there is no coordination between the systems for registering trademarks and for registering domain names. Trademarks are registered by a public, governmental authority, and the rights granted can only be exercised within a specific territory. By contrast, the domain name system has no geographic boundaries and is not controlled by governments. Domain names are registered on a first-come, first-served basis and each name offers a unique, global presence on the Internet. The lack of any connection between these two systems has made it possible for "cybersquatters" to register domain names incorporating trademarks rightfully owned by another party and to sell those domain names to the trademark owners at inflated prices.

Such conflicts between owners of domain names and trademarks often have unusual characteristics that stretch the capacity of ordinary judicial systems which are country-specific and not well adapted to disputes with global dimensions. As litigation can be slow and costly, and as the law in this area is still uncertain, it is usually quicker and cheaper for trademark holders to negotiate with cybersquatters rather than fight for their rights through litigation.

For further details please contact Ms. Lucinda Jones, Consultant, Electronic Commerce Section at WIPO:

Tel: (+41 22) 338 81 38
Fax: (+41 22) 740 37 00
E-mail: lucinda.jones@wipo.int