TEN YEARS OF THE UDRP: OUTLINES OF UNIFORM PRACTICE

Abstract

The paper analyses the case law of panels applying the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). The UDRP applies only to cases of classical cybersquatting, i.e. mala fide registrations of domain names identical or similar to a trademark. Nowdays, more than ten years since the adoption of the UDRP, one could conclude that a homogenous interpretation of the rules has been largely achieved. Although the UDRP is not based on a precedent system, in most cases panelists do follow the majority view taken by the panels in the previous cases, which increases legal certainty. However, certain differencies among panels subsist, in particular regarding the identification of the «legitimate interest» of the respondent to use a domain name, under the second UDRP substantive element. Such departing from the well-established case law could be prevented by amending the UDRP, especially if this would comprise defining of certain concepts. Still, amendments of the UDRP do not seem to be possible in the near future, given the opposite interests of ICANN and trademarks owners.