上海律师杨春宝主持的法律专业网站群: 法律桥 :: 会见律师网 :: 公司投资律师 :: 创业与法律 :: 律师博客 :: 法律论坛 :: Law Bridge
聘请律师: 法律顾问 :: 公司法律师 :: 投资律师 :: 房地产律师 :: 知识产权律师 :: 电信网络律师 :: 法律服务热线:13901826830(杨春宝律师)
主持律师 会见公司投资律师 会见房地产律师
联盟律师 会见知识产权律师 会见电信网络律师
最新文章
·我国域名管理新办法行将施行
·域名及其管理若干法律问题研究
·网络时代的国际商事仲裁
·电子货币及相关法律、监管问题
·从全球范围看域名法律问题
·《互联网上网服务营业场所管理条例
·电信网络法律期刊
·电子空间(cyberspace)的发展与规制
·电信经营许可收紧了?
·简析域名纠纷适用法律的司法解释
推荐文章
·我国域名管理新办法行将施行
·域名及其管理若干法律问题研究
·网络时代的国际商事仲裁
·电子货币及相关法律、监管问题
·从全球范围看域名法律问题
·《互联网上网服务营业场所管理条例
·电子空间(cyberspace)的发展与规制
·电信经营许可收紧了?
·简析域名纠纷适用法律的司法解释
·重构科学统一的域名管理体系(《电
最热文章
·电子货币及相关法律、监管问题
·域名及其管理若干法律问题研究
·电子空间(cyberspace)的发展与规制
·《互联网上网服务营业场所管理条例
·从全球范围看域名法律问题
·简析域名纠纷适用法律的司法解释
·网络时代的国际商事仲裁
·我国域名管理新办法行将施行
·电信网络法律期刊
·电信经营许可收紧了?
 
相关文章
·我国域名管理新办法行将施行
·域名及其管理若干法律问题研究
·网络时代的国际商事仲裁
·电子货币及相关法律、监管问题
·从全球范围看域名法律问题
·《互联网上网服务营业场所管理条例
·电信网络法律期刊
·电子空间(cyberspace)的发展与规制
·电信经营许可收紧了?
·简析域名纠纷适用法律的司法解释
相关专题
·亚商在线大肆非法盗用本站文章
·网络链接案例简评
·网络文章一大抄?
·民事判决书(站长诉华炎科技著作权侵权)
·网络著作权问题咨询
·网络传播权引发法律争论(《中国青年报》2003年1月14日)
您的位置:会见律师网>>电信网络法>>法律研究>>文章内容
 
从全球范围看域名法律问题

作者:杨春宝律师 来自:法律桥 时间:2004-12-19 20:31:16

您是本文第  位阅读者  【字体:放大 正常 缩小


III. The management of domain name system

The domain name system (DNS) serves the central function of facilitating users?ability to navigate the Internet. It does so with the aid of two components: the domain name and its corresponding Internet Protocol (IP) number. A domain name is the human-friendly address of a computer that is usually in a form that is easy to remember or to identify, such as www.wipo.int. An IP number is the unique underlying numeric address, such as 192.91.247.53. The DNS operates on the basis of a hierarchy of names. At the top are the top-level domains (TLDs), which are generally divided into two categories: the generic top-level domains (gTLDs) and the country code top-level domains (ccTLDs). There are seven gTLDs at present.78 Three of these (.com, .net and .org) are open to all persons or entities. The other four gTLDs (.int, .edu, .gov and .mil) are restricted, only certain entities meeting certain criteria may register names in them. There are at present 243 ccTLDs. Each of these domains bears a two-letter country code, for example .au (Australia), .cn(China) and .fr (France). Some of these domains are open, others are restricted, only persons or entities satisfying certain criteria (for example, domicile within the territory) may register names in them. Functionally, there is no distinction between the gTLDs and the ccTLDs.

The Internet technical development has been guided by protocols established through participatory decision-making processes by bodies such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and its subcommittees, and the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). However, there has not been a central rule-making entity that has exercised comprehensive legislative authority over the Internet. And the DNS was used for about 12 years (1982-94) without creating any significant public policy issues. The year 1995 can be used as the date when the Internet became a truly commercial, public medium. In 1995, the USA government allowed Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI) to be responsible for registering domain name in the gTLDs .com, .net and .org. NSI adopted the ’first come, first sreved?policy for registration of domain name and a Dispute Resolution Procedure to deal with the conflict between trademarks and domain names. NSI policy was criticized for it strongly favoring the owner of a trademark registration and it was also criticized as operating a monopoly in the reserving of the .com, .net and .org TLDs.

The USA Department of Commerce (DOC) issued for comment A Proposal to Improve the Technical Management of Internet Names and Addresses (the "Green Paper") on January 30, 1998.79 It proposed for discussion a number of measures relating to the administration of the DNS, including the creation by the private sector of a new corporation located in the USA and managed by a globally and functionally representative Board of Directors. Following the closure of the comment period, DOC issued its Statement of Policy on the Management of Internet Names and Addresses (the "White Paper") on June 5, 1998.80 It confirmed the call contained in the Green Paper for the creation of a new, private, not-for-profit corporation responsible for coordinating specific DNS functions for the benefit of the Internet as a whole. Following the publication of the White Paper, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) was established, then DOC and ICANN entered into a Memorandum of Understanding in November 1998, with the intention of coordinating the on-going transition of the management of the DNS.81

In the "White Paper", DOC alleged that the USA Government ”is committed to a transition that will allow the private sector to take leadership for DNS management?and international organizations may provide specific expertise or act as advisors to ICANN. While it granted authority to ICANN, it alleged that it still believed that neither national governments acting as sovereigns nor intergovernmental organizations acting as representatives of governments should participate in management of Internet names and addresses. It called on WIPO to ”initiate a balanced and transparent process?to develop recommendations for a uniform approach to resolving trademark/domain name disputes involving cyberpiracy, recommend a process for protecting famous trademarks in the gTLDs, and evaluate the effects of adding new gTLDs and related dispute resolution procedures on trademark and intellectual property holders. ?U>These findings and recommendations could be submitted to the board of the new corporation for its consideration in conjunction with its development of registry and registrar policy and the creation and introduction of new gTLDs.? (emphasis added)

As an organ of the United Nations, responsible to all its member states rather than just the USA, WIPO felt empowered to define its own terms of reference. WIPO stated that it intended to make recommendations concerning dispute prevention, dispute resolution, process for the protection of famous and well-known marks in the gTLDs and effects on intellectual property rights of new gTLDs.82 WIPO thus gave itself a considerably broader and more ambitious charge than the fairly narrow one proposed by the USA. Unfortunately, the Final Report83 largely returns to the original mandate suggested by the USA Government. WIPO's recommendations in the Final Report has been submitted to ICANN, which can adopt them, modify them, or ignore them as it will. However, WIPO's report is likely to be influential. ICANN's registrar accreditation guidelines adopted some of the features of the WIPO interim report. On 24 October 1999, ICANN approved the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy which has been adopted by all domain name registrars,84 and four dispute-resolution service provider were approved so far.85 Thus, ICANN, a so-called ”private?USA corporation became the administrative authority of the DNS and a USA-centric management of DNS thus was established.


[首页]    [上一页]    [下一页]    [末页]    

发送给好友】【刷新本页】【打印本页】【关闭窗口】【本页顶部

  发表评论须知:
  • 请注意文明用语,请勿人身攻击。
  • 请尊重网上道德,遵守中华人民共和国各项相关法律法规。
  • 您应当对因您的行为而直接或间接导致的民事或刑事法律责任负责。
  • 本站有权在网站内转载或引用您的评论。
  • 网站管理员有权删除违反上述提示的评论。
  • 法律咨询请勿在此提出,咨询请去律师论坛
  • 参与本评论即表明您已经阅读并接受上述条款。
会员名称:
匿名用户 ·注册用户·忘记密码?
密码:
评论内容:
(最多300个字符)
  查看评论

本站声明:本站所载之法律论文、法律评论、案例、法律咨询等,除非另有注明,著作权人均为站长杨春宝律师本人。欢迎其他网站链接,但是,未经站长书面许可,不得擅自摘编、转载。引用及经许可转载时均应注明出处“会见律师网”,并链接本站。本站网址:http://www.meetlawyer.com/.

本站所有内容(包括法律咨询)仅供参考,不构成法律意见,站长不对资料的完整性和时效性负责。您在处理具体法律事务时,请洽询有资质的律师。本站将努力为广大网友提供更好的服务,但不对本站提供的任何免费服务作出正式的承诺。本站所载投稿文章,其言论不代表本站观点,如需使用,请与原作者联系,版权归原作者所有。