DOMAIN

Domain is nothing but recognition of a company or a business for all the internet users.
There is no specific law as such for domains in India but comes under the trademark act.
Domain names are organized in subordinate levels (subdomains). The first-level set of
domain names are the top-level domains (TLDs), including the generic top-level domains
(gTLDs), such as the prominent domains com, info, net, edu, and org, and the country
code top-level domains (ccTLDs). Below these top-level domains in the DNS hierarchy
are the second-level that are written to the left of the top-level domains (In .co.uk, co is
the second-level domain) and third-level domain written immediately to the left of a
second-level domain.
Domains generally registered as top level domains and are of two types: generic top level
domain (further classified into restricted and un-restricted top level domains) and country
code top level domain.
There are approximately 60 million internet domains across the globe, of which 40
million are gTLD and 20 million are ccTLD.
From 1992- 1998- Network Solutions Inc (NSI) was registering the domain names.
Network Solutions Inc is an American technology company founded in 1979. NSI is the
first company to operate the domain name system (DNS) registry under a sub-contract
with the U.S. Defence Information Systems Agency (DISA) in September 1991.
In 1999, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a non-
profit private sector corporation based in California has assumed management of the
domain name system from NSI. It is now a key player in the domain name arena.

REGISTRATION OF gTLDs
 Generic top-level domains are issued by Registrars, which are accredited by Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).
Any entity that wants to offer domain name registration services under gTLDs with a
direct access to the gTLD registries is required to obtain an accreditation from ICANN.
To that end, the interested entity must apply for accreditation and demonstrate that it
meets all the technical, operational and financial criteria necessary to qualify as a registrar
business. The relationship between ICANN and every accredited registrar is governed by
the individual Registrar Accreditation Agreements (RAA) 1, which set out the obligations
of both parties.
An individual or legal entity wishing to register a domain name under a generic top-level
domain ("gTLD") may do so by using an ICANN-accredited registrar. The relationship
between a domain name registrant and the ICANN-accredited registrar is governed by a
Registration Agreement between the two parties.

DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS

Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UNDRP)2 adopted by ICANN, sets
forth the terms and conditions in connection with disputes between parties over the
registration and use of an Internet domain name registered.
Para 4 of the policy mentions that the proceedings are to be conducted according to the
Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy3.
Domain name holders are required to submit to a mandatory administrative proceeding
directed by one of the approved dispute resolution providers. The dispute resolution
providers that have been approved by ICANN.4

1 https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/approved-with-specs-2013-09-17-en

2 https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2012-02-25-en

3 https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/udrp-rules-2015-03-11-en

4 https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/providers-6d-2012-02-25-en
 After a complaint is submitted to the Provider,5 a panel from the list of panellists,
maintained by the provider, shall be appointed within 5 days of the response of the
Provider or on the lapse of the time period for submission thereof. Once the entire Panel
is appointed, the Provider shall notify the Parties of the Panellists appointed and the date
by which, absent exceptional circumstances, the Panel shall forward its decision on the
complaint to the Provider. 6
The Powers of Panel are restricted as per the UNDRP Rules and unless otherwise agreed
by the Parties the language of the proceedings shall be the language of the Registration
Agreement.7
Administrative panels generally prohibit in-person hearings, including teleconferences,
videoconferences, and web conferences.8 The process includes no testimony, cross-
examination, briefing, or argument; moreover, the arbitration grants no power for
discovery aside from the ability to request additional documents. Rebuttals are limited to
the discretion of the panellists.
The Panel shall forward its decision to the Provider within 14 days of its appointment . It
shall be in writing, provide the reasons on which it is based, indicate the date on which it
was rendered and identify the name of the Panellist.9
The Provider within 3 days of receiving the decision from the Panel shall communicate
the same to the Parties, the concerned Registrar and ICANN. The Registrar within three
days of receiving such decision shall communicate to the Parties and ICANN the date of
implementation of the decision.10

5 Paragraph 3 of UDRP Rules

6 Paragraph 6 of UDRP Rules

7 Para 10 and 11 UDRP Rules

8 Paragraph 13 UDRP Rules

9 Paragraph 15 UDRP Rules

10 Paragraph 16 UDRP Rules

 If the decision of the Administration Panel requires a transfer, cancellation 11 Registrar
shall be directed to perform the same pursuant to Paragraph 3(c) of UDRP Policy.12

The parties are not prevented from submitting the dispute to a court of competent
jurisdiction for independent resolution before such mandatory administrative proceeding
is commenced or after such proceeding is concluded. The party wishing to initiate legal
proceedings shall within ten days after Registrar has received the decision of
Administrative Panel shall submit official documentation that he has initiated a lawsuit.13
The jurisdiction is either the location of Registrars principal office or of address of the
Part submitting the case to the court as shown in the Whois database.14

SUGGESTIONS:
Demand advanced payments before registration of a domain name, thus greatly
increasing the cost of mass domain name speculation,
Provide more precise definitions and provide more examples for terms such as bad
faith and legitimate interests,
Recommend a choice of law provision to guide disputes among complainants and
respondents of diverse jurisdictions,
Provide guidelines for evidentiary documentation, especially for common law mark
owners,
Provide guidelines for the refusal of cases.

SOLUTIONS:

11 The only remedies available to the complainant under 4(i) of UDRP Policy

12 our receipt of a decision of an Administrative Panel requiring such action in any administrative
proceeding to which you were a party and which was conducted under this Policy or a later version of
this Policy adopted by ICANN

13 See Paragraph 4(k) UDRP Policy

14 See Paragraphs 1 of the UDRP Rules

Many of the current problems with the UDRP would be resolved if panels were given less
discretion, which would be achieved if the policy were clearer. The UDRP needs to be
amended to clarify the position relating to geographical indicators and personal names

Future problems, and in particular inconsistent decisions, could be avoided if an appeal level
was added to the system. If the decisions of an appeal panel served as binding precedent for
all panels, problems of interpretation could be swiftly resolved. The idea of an appeal level
was initially rejected as unnecessary due to the availability of appeal to Courts, and too
complicated for the streamlined procedure. However, the appeal to national Courts option has
proven ineffective, and an appeal level would not greatly complicate the process if it were
kept to a similar timescale as the initial procedure, and if appeals were limited to resolving
inconsistencies and questions of interpretation. Even with an internal appeals system, the
external constraint of appeals to national courts needs to be made more practical.

The power of providers to control the allocation of cases to particular panellists should be
eliminated. Instead, each provider should be made to operate a cab-rank rule, where
panellists are allocated cases in a certain order, subject to availability and conflicts of interest.
This would require a certain amount of policing by ICANN, but would not be time-
consuming, requiring a simple check of published decisions to ensure that all panellists were
hearing approximately the same number of cases.

DOMESTIC COURTS INTERVENTION WITH THE UDRP JURISPRUDENCE

The popularity and success of ICANNs UDRP jurisdiction will grow if it receives
encouragement and support from the domestic Courts. One particular decision from an Indian
Court shows how easily domestic courts can if they are so willing, accommodate, respect
panel decisions and have them implemented.

Maruti Software Private Limited versus Maruti Udyog Limited.[CWP 42/2001], the Delhi
High Court dismissed a petition filed by the registrant after the registrant had suffered a panel
decision. Instead of reconsidering evidence and arguments afresh, The Court held The
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Centre on the facts of the case was, therefore, justified in
holding that the domain name was registered by the petitioner and used by it in bad faith and
it had no legitimate interest in respect of the domain name. In my opinion, there are no merits
in the petition nor has any case been made out for interference in the order of the WIPO
Arbitration and Mediation Centre. The petition is misconceived and is, accordingly,
dismissed.

Registration of .IN domain

.IN domain names are available to anyone. Companies, individuals, and organizations in
India and abroad are eligible. Use the WHOIS search to see if the name you want is available.
To register, visit our list of accredited .IN Registrars. These companies are authorized to
sell .IN domains to the public. The .IN Registry has also introduced Terms and Conditions for
Registrants and IDN Terms and Conditions for Registrants. Please note that all the registrants
of .IN domain names and IDNs will be bound by the respective terms and conditions, which
may be amended by .IN Registry from time to time.

Jurisdiction of filing domain disputes UDRP (for generic top level domain) which is
covered under ICANN AND INDRP is restricted to Indian country code domains (for
country code top level domain).INDRP (22,05,750) has 17 rules of procedure for
arbitration under .IN registry.
CASE LAWS UNDER INDRP:
1. STARBUCKS CORPERATION V MOHANRAJ (26th November, 2009):
Respondent domain name was www.starbucks.co.in and the complainant name
was registered as www.starbucks.in. Respondent when asked about the same said
that .in registry of domains didnt ask for any documents to submit and also
contended that the complainant was silent for almost 4 years after he registered
such domain. Respondent was neither having any fair use nor is he known as
Starbucks in India. Hence has to hand over his domain to complainant as said by
arbitrator in this case.
2. GOOGLE INC. V GULSHAN KATRI( 6th May 2011): Respondent in this case
registered a domain name as googlee.in and contended that both are search
engines and both are different in their nature, for which complainant contended
that it is deceiving in nature as it is much similar to a famous mark Google.
Arbitrator decided in complainant favour since it is considered to be fraud.