The case of Shri Jagdish Purohit v. Mr. Stephen Koeing before Shri Rajiv Singh Chauhan, Arbitrator; (available at http://www.inregistry.in/policies/dispute_resolution/dispute_decisions/business.pdf) makes a most interesting reading.
The dipsute concerns the domain name www.internet.in.
[As a background the .in Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy is substantially the same as the UDRP]
The complainant argues that he has trade mark rights over the term internet having registered it, in India in respect of tobacco and other allied products.
The arbitrator goes into a long drawn out analysis to reach the conclusion that the term 'internet' is generic and therefore that niether parties have a right to the trade mark - a fair point. From this generally acceptable proposition, our friend Mr. Chauhan seems to reach the conclusion that since domain names are trade marks, neither party has the right to the domain name and so orders that it be siezed (huh?) and retained by the Registry.
The least stated about the judgment - the better. Suffice to say that Mr. Chauhan's opinion and the order is bunkum !!
The judgment seems to reflect the utter shambles within which the IDRP is built - the arbitrators being proficient in niether the law nor the technology. Perhaps, till a method for the efficient running of the dispute resolution mechanism is put in place - a special court may be more equipped to deal with such matters.
No comments:
Post a Comment