Dispute Resolution - E-Commerce - Lecture Slides, Slides of Fundamentals of E-Commerce

Students of Communication, study E-Commerce as an auxiliary subject. these are the key points discussed in these Lecture Slides of E-Commerce : Dispute Resolution, Registration, Adaptive Molecular, Technologies, Domain, Cybersquatting, Bad Faith, Alcoholics, Respondent, Legitimate Business

Typology: Slides

2012/2013

Uploaded on 07/29/2013

satinder
satinder 🇮🇳

4.2

(21)

131 documents

1 / 11

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Dispute Resolution (cont.)
May decline registration pending court decision
Adaptive Molecular Technologies v
Woodward (F&Q p239)
Domain can prevail over Trade Mark
Gateway v Pixelera.com (F&Q p239)
Cybersquatting
Telstra v Joen (F&Q p240)
Bad Faith
Kraft v The Pez Kiosk (F&Q p240)
Docsity.com
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa

Partial preview of the text

Download Dispute Resolution - E-Commerce - Lecture Slides and more Slides Fundamentals of E-Commerce in PDF only on Docsity!

Dispute Resolution (cont.) 

May decline registration pending court decision

Adaptive Molecular Technologies vWoodward (F&Q p239)  Domain can prevail over Trade Mark

Gateway v Pixelera.com (F&Q p239)  Cybersquatting

Telstra v Joen (F&Q p240)  Bad Faith

Kraft v The Pez Kiosk (F&Q p240)

Dispute Resolution (cont.) 

Alcoholics Anonymous v Friends of Bill W (F&Qp240)

No bad faith  Respondent had a legitimate business activitynot in competition with applicant  Geographical Names

Brisbane City Council v Warren BoltonConsulting (F&Q p247-248)

Alternative Protection (cont.) 

Alternatively, plaintiff must show

It is a personal name  Defendant registered the personal name as adomain name without consent  Domain name has bad faith intent to profitfrom plaintiff’s personal name  Allows for transfer, damages and costs  Slower than UDRP

Alternative Protection (cont.) 

Courts are not bound by UDRP decisions  Can be used to, in effect, review UDRPdecisions

Barcelona.com (F&Q p243)  Corinthians (F&Q p243)  Does this make the US Courts de facto InternetCourts of Appeal?

Passing Off Cont.) 

Passing off only protects the reputation that atrader can prove  May be restricted by  Geography (e.g. Prince PLC)  type of goods (e.g. Spice Girls) or  section of the community (e.g. AIM)  Mere registration of a domain name withouttrade is not enough  Representation can occur when domain nameis offered for sale

Passing Off (cont.) 

Factors negating misrepresentation  Name has obtained a secondary meaningand is descriptive of goods and servicesprovided  Use of a person’s own name  Re Krupp (F&Q p249)  Actions outside the trader’s country  Internet World Case (F&Q p250)

Passing Off (cont.) 

Courts look for a “Common field of activity” toassess if there is a representation to a tradersactual or prospective customers  Stringfellow v McCain (F&Q p251)

Section 52 Trade Practices Act 

“A corporation shall not, in trade or commerce,engage in conduct that is misleading ordeceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive.”  Requires  Identification of a section of the public that is likely tobe misled  Assessment of the abilities of the people in thissection  Objective assessment of whether these people will bemisled  A causal connection between the representation andthe defendant’s behavior