E-commerce facilitated the use and registration of domain names and as the former grew in volume the latter grew in number. Originally, the utility of domain names was to identify the websites and connect the computers but eventually domain names became ‘Trademarks in virtual world’. A battle ensued in the cyber world to usurp real world trademarks and convert them into domain names of the virtual space. Disputes were an inevitable consequence and resolution a pressing need.

Under the aegis of World Intellectual Property Organization, a uniform policy for resolution of domain names was formulated so as to find expeditious solutions to the mounting disputes. Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) was adopted by ICANN, which came into effect on December 1, 1999, for all ICANN-accredited registrars of Internet domain names.

The Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, 1999 governs disputes relating to the use and registration of the domain names between the proprietor of the domain name and any party other than the Registrar. Though the policy is enforced by ICANN, it does not play any role in dispute resolution between the parties.

Under UDRP, whenever an application for registration or renewal of a domain name is sought, there an implied warranty on the part of the applicant that:

Ordinarily, the proprietor of the domain name has the right to choose the forum for dispute resolution; that is to say, he can move the court or tribunal having jurisdiction over the matter. However, it will be mandatory for the proprietor to submit a dispute to administrative proceedings if any third party makes a complaint to the applicable Provider alleging any of the following:

Like any other administrative proceedings the onus of proving any of the above elements lies on the complainant.

The mandatory administrative proceeding does not oust the jurisdiction of the Courts over the dispute. Thus either of the party can move the court before the commencement or after the conclusion of the administrative proceedings. The decision of the Panel as to the cancellation or transfer of the domain name shall not be implemented until ten business days have elapsed form the date of communication of the decision by the provider. If the proprietor institutes a law suit within that period and sends a copy of the complaint file-stamped by the clerk of the court, the implementation of the decision shall be put in abeyance until the ICANN receives (i) satisfactory evidence of a resolution between the parties; (ii) satisfactory evidence that the lawsuit has been dismissed or withdrawn; or (iii) a copy of an order from such court dismissing the lawsuit or ordering that the proprietor does not have the right to continue to use your domain name.

As it is a formidable task for the complainant to prove malafides or bad faith on the part of the proprietor in getting the impugned domain name registered, the policy specifies the facts that would serve as an evidence of bad faith. Thus where following facts are established, bad faith will be proved:

In defense to the complaint against registration of the domain name the proprietor can demonstrate his/her rights and legitimate interest in the domain name by adducing evidence as to:

There are two remedies available to a complainant in any administrative proceeding namely: cancellation of the domain name or transfer of the domain name registration to the complainant.