The rise of e-commerce has lead internet to become tool for the masses and crucial agent for business transactions, governmental policies, social interaction etc. Risk comes along with the opportunities and the world including India is facing liabilities of in the field of intellectual property, data privacy etc. The challenge the law has faced in recent years is, how to promote the development of intellectual property on the Internet while preventing its unauthorized use.
Is it rediff.com, raddiff.com, yahoo.co.in or yahoo.com?? Quite a job to get confused?? In simple terms, it is a practice:
Cybersquatting is best defined in Manish Vij v. Indra Chugh, AIR 2002 Del 243, the court held that “an act of obtaining fraudulent registration with an intent to sell the domain name to the lawful owner of the name at a premium”.
The first case in India with regard to cybersquatting was Yahoo Inc. V. Aakash Arora & Anr., where the defendant launched a website nearly identical to the plaintiff’s renowned website and also provided similar services. Here the court ruled in favour of trademark rights of U.S. based Yahoo. Inc (the Plaintiff) and against the defendant, that had registered itself as YahooIndia.com with an observation that it was an effort to trade on the fame of yahoo’s trademark.
The Bombay High Court in Rediff Communication v. Cyberbooth & Anr 2000 PTC 209 observed that the value and importance of a domain name is like a corporate asset of a company.
In Satyam Infoway Ltd. v Sifynet Solutions 2004 (6) SCC 145, the Respondent had registered domain names www.siffynet.com and www.siffynet.net which were similar to the Plaintiff’s domain name www.sifynet.com. Satyam (Plaintiff) had an image in the market and had registered the name Sifynet and various other names with ICANN and WIPO. The Supreme Court held that “domain names are business identifiers, serving to identify and distinguish the business itself or its goods and services and to specify its corresponding online location”
In India we have no Domain Name Protection Law and cyber squatting cases are decided under Trade Mark Act, 1999. The Indian Courts have drawn the distinction between trade mark and domain name. Like in other cases under Trademarks Act, 1999 two kind of reliefs are available:
Dispute involving bad faith registrations are typically resolved using the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) process developed by the ICANN. Under UDRP, WIPO is the leading ICANN accredited domain name dispute resolution service provider and was established as a vehicle for promoting the protection, dissemination, and the use of intellectual property throughout the world. India is one of the 171 states of the world which are members of WIPO.
A person may complain before the administration dispute resolution service providers listed by ICANN under Rule 4 (a) that:
The need of the hour is to have a uniform law to curb the increasing incidents of Cybersquatting as it affects the goodwill and the reputation of the owner at large. It can be used as a tool for blackmailing and taking undue advantage by the registrant.
The other way at looking at it is that though Cybersquatting is a crime affecting society, its basic victim is Trademark owner & application of ‘Permanent Injunction’ restraining its use should be stressed and any damages arising out of the illegal and unethical registration of the same should be awarded to the complainant. An attempt should be made to stringent the registration process of domain names & standards should be set for its approval. The registration should be awarded only when all the ethical & legal requirements have been met by the Applicant of the domain name.
Blacklisting can be one of the mean to reduce the Cybersquatting. ICANN should roll out frame strict policies with respect to the punishment for individual found guilty in Cybersquatting.
In disputes, the benefit should be awarded to aggrieved party with a guilty Cybersquatter losing its domain name registration including those which are legal & take off all other benefits which Cybersquatter would probably receive from the use of Internet. This would serve as a deterrent on “Future” Cybersquatters as limiting the benefits from the use of Internet would definitely harm anyone in today’s “Internet” world.
www.grandmasters.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.rcls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.itlegalsummit.com | 8 Years & Counting
www.bfls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.maels.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.plcs.co.in | 8 Years & Counting
Copyright © 2020 Lex Witness - India's 1st Magazine on Legal & Corporate Affairs Rights of Admission Reserved
