Publications
European IP Bulletin, Issue 21, April -Hot Topics
Hot Topics
1. New WIPO Information Tool on UDRP Designs
On 23 March 2005, the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) announced that the Arbitration and Mediation Center of the organisation has created and made available online a new information tool that offers a concise view of trends in decisions taken under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP).
The UDRP, proposed by WIPO, was adopted by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) in October 1999. It sets forth the terms and conditions relating to disputes over the registration and use of internet domain names. Disputes are decided by independent panellists drawn from a list of 400 trade mark specialists from over 50 counties. The new legal index is based on a review of all UDRP panel decisions rendered to date, with new decisions being added continuously.
The principal aim of the index is to offer structured access to the large quantity of legal and other data contained in the WIPO panel decisions under the UDRP. The index provides an informative sample of decisions with regard to specific issues of interest, such as associations and institutions, geographical identifiers, individuals, industry and commerce, professional firms, education and the public sector. Users may select one or more fields of research at a time in categories such as “decided cases by domain name categories” or “legal index to panel decisions” or a combination of categories. The index also aims to provide an analysis of UDRP decisions, in order to enhance the predictability of the UDRP mechanisms. Even though consensus or clear majority views have developed on most issues, the UDRP decisions cover such a multitude of facts and arguments that it is hard to avoid genuine differences of opinion on some of the issues, especially since panellists and parties come from a multitude of jurisdictions.
The new information tool, which is intended for legal practitioners, academics, policy-makers and existing and potential owners of domain names, is expected to help raise awareness on the views of the panels and help parties to understand better the UDRP system. According to Mr. Francis Gurry, WIPO Deputy Director General “By offering a concise overview of UDRP decision trends, this new tool will further enhance the consistency and reasoning of decisions taken under the UDRP and will help parties to better assess their chances under the UDRP”.
2. Annual Enforcement Report Released
On 31 March 2005, The Patent Office published the 2004 UK Intellectual Property Crime Strategy Annual Enforcement Report.
This annual report is the first under the National Intellectual Property Crime Strategy, which was launched in August 2004, and draws together the work carried out by a variety of governmental and private organisations involved in preventing crime, ranging from the UK Patent Office and Interpol, through to Manchester United plc. The report consists primarily of separate sections relating to each individual organisation, although several general issues are raised, most notably the difficulties in accurately assessing IP crime.
One of the major aims of the IP crime strategy is to monitor trends and analyse developments in intellectual property crime, so as to refine approaches and enable better use of resources. However, this goal appears to have been severely hampered because of problems in collecting and reporting data, due to both a low level of reporting of IP crime, and the different methods used in reporting such crimes.
Particular areas of concern highlighted in the report include the increasing counterfeiting of medicinal products, and the problems in enforcement created by the concealment of the origin of counterfeit goods, achieved by trafficking through several different states, with ultimate supply from a state not known for counterfeiting. Certain successes are also noted including an estimated 20% decrease in the number of illegal files available on the Internet and prosecutions brought as a result of co-operation between different organisations.
Ultimately, the report calls for increased cooperation between the various organisations involved, and in particular more consistent means of monitoring and assessing IP crime.
Click here to return to the Summary page, or on any of the headings below to see the full case notes for that topic:
