Domain name disputes may seem like an unimportant topic in the context of a real war between two countries, but the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the ongoing devastation there may have some people wondering how cybersquatting issues are handled in those parts of the world.
In this video, I explain the .UA Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, which went into effect in 2019 and is based on the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), with one significant substantive difference: The .UA policy only requires a trademark owner to prove that a domain name was registered or is being used in bad faith, not both.
I also discuss a number of procedural differences between the .UA dispute policy and the UDRP, including the language of proceedings (limited to English, Russian or Ukrainian) and the “mutual jurisdiction” provision (which is limited to the courts of Ukraine).
In the video, I also note that the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) — which is the only provider of dispute services under the .UA policy — has just issued a statement that applies to .UA disputes, or perhaps even to other domain name disputes that involve complainants or respondents from Ukraine or Russia. WIPO has said:
To the extent that parties (or potential parties) in WIPO Mediation, Arbitration or Domain Name Disputes are unable, or anticipate being unable, to perform an action within the prescribed time limits, they should, if possible, contact the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center.
It’s unclear what, exactly, the implication of this statement may be, but it’s quite possible that WIPO may extend deadlines for affected parties, just like it has done as a result of the COVID pandemic.
