Alan Adlarında Kötü Niyet Kavramı

Yıl 2012, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 1, 67 - 84, 01.06.2012

Ayça Zorluğlu

Öz

İnternetin hızlı gelişimi ile alan adları kendilerine tartışmasız büyük ve önemli bir yer edinmişleridir. Bu alanda doğan uyuşmazlıklar WIPO, ICANN, UDRP veya bunlardan etkilenen sistemler ekseninde çözüm bulmaktadır. Bu düzenlemelerin hiç birinde kötü niyet kavramının tam bir tanımı yapılmamış olup yalnızca kötü niyet sayılabilecek haller örneklenmiştir. Bu çalışma Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) sisteminde yer alan kötü niyet kavramına açıklık getirme çabasındadır. Ayrıca kötü niyetin varlığına hükmetmek için UDRP tarafından getirilen koşullar eleştirel bir bakış açısıyla değerlendirilmeye çalışılmıştır. Günümüzde hali hazırda büyük bir ekonomik değere sahip olan alan adlarının gelecekte de önemini arttırarak devam ettireceği düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Alan Adları, WIPO, UDRP, ICANN, Kötü Niyet

BAD FAITH IN DOMAIN NAMES

Öz

A ccording to the rapid development of the Internet, domain names gain a significant and remarkable role. The issues related to domain names are solved in orbit of WIPO, ICANN, UDRP and systems impressed by them. None of these systems include the exact definion of ‘Bad Faith’, only some examples of bad faith are given. This study aims to clarify the term of bad faith under the UDRP system. Additionally, the conditions under the URDP system to decide on bad faith are examined critically. Domain names are already have a fundamental economic value and it has been considered that, this importance will keep on improving increasingly

Anahtar Kelimeler

Domain Names, WIPO, ICANN, UDRP, Bad Faith1

Kaynakça

• Anonim Yazar, “Analysis of Key UDRP Issues”, 2000, The Berkman Center for Internet & Society, <http:// cyber.law.harvard.edu/udrp/analysis.html#rights> (erişim tarihi 20 Temmuz 2011)
• BENDER, Amy, Division 3: Bad Faith, 2002 <http://cyber. law.harvard.edu/udrp/opinion/btext.html> tarihi 5 Temmuz 2011) (erişim
• BETTINGER, Torsten, “The Domain Name System and the Procedures and Policies fort he Registration of Domain Names” and “Alternative Dispute Resolution”,
• Torsten Bettinger, Domain Name Law and Practice,Oxford University Press, New York, 2005.
• Bylaws For Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and general/bylaws.htm> (erişim tarihi 20 Haziran 2011)
• CHAMRIA, Ravi, Domain Name in Bad Faith or Intent?, Faith-or-Intent?&id=87836> (erişim tarihi 16 Haziran 2011)
• CHICOINE, Caroline G., “Domain Name Governance”, Lisa E. Cristal and Neal S. Greenfield (eds), Trademark Law and the Internet, 2. Basım, INTA Publication, New York, 2001.
• CHIK, Warren B., “Lord of Your Domain, but Master of None: The Need to Harmonize and Recalibrate The Domain Name Regime of Ownership and Control”, International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 2008, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1.
• CLARKE, Osborne, A Practical Guide to E-commerce and Internet Law, 1. Basım, ICSA Publishing 2002.
• Final Report- New Top Level Domains of National Importance, Norwegian Ministry of Transport and Communications, 2011.
• GREENFIELD, Neal S, “Trademark Dilution”, Lisa E. Cristal and Neal. S. Greenfield, Trademark Law and The Internet, INTA Publication, 2 Basım, New York, 2001.
• GREENFIELD, Neal S./ DEUTSCH, Sarah, “The U.S. Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act”, Lisa E. Cristal and Neal S. Greenfield, Trademark Law and the Internet, INTA Publication, 2. Basım, New York, 2001.
• Have a Problem? Dispute Resolution Options <http:// www.icann.org/en/dispute-resolution/#udrp> (erişim tarihi 23 Haziran 2011)
• HEDLEY, Steve, The Law of Electronic Commerce and The Internet in The UK and Ireland, 1. Basım, Cavendish Publishing Limited, 2006.
• KING, Stacey H,” Trademarks, Domain Names, and the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy”, Lisa E. Cristal and Neal S. Greenfield, Trademark Law and The Internet, INTA Publications, 2. Basım, New York, 2001.
• LEVINE, Gerald M, Disrupting the Business of a Competitor, 29 Ocak 2011, <http://udrpcommentaries. wordpress.com/2011/01/29/disrupting-the-business- of-a-competitor/> (erişim tarihi 21 Temmuz 2011)
• LINDSAY, David, International Domain Name Law ICANN and the UDRP, Hart Publishing, 2007.
• LIPTON, Jacqueline, “Bad Faith in Cyberspace: Grounding Domain Name Theory in Trademark, Property and Restitution”, From the Selected Works of
• Jacqueline D Lipton, 2009, <http://works.bepress.
• com/jacqueline_lipton/8> (erişim tarihi 16 Haziran 2011)
• MOORE, Mairead, “Cybersquatting: Prevention Better Than Cure?”, 2009, International Journal of Law and Information Technology, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 2 220
• OLSEN, John R/ MANIATIS, Spyros M. / WOOD, Nicholas/ LOVERDOU, Tina / ZOGRAFOS, Domain Names, Sweet and Maxwell, London, 2007.
• PIZZALOE, Antonella Giulia, “Internet Governance Analysis of technological and regulatory assumptions,
• of theoretical principles, of historical development and goals”, NEXA Center for Internet & Society, 2012 Governance.pdf> (erişim tarihi 19 Şubat 2012)
• RHEIN, Eberhard, “Reverse domain name hijacking: suggestions”, analysis Intellectual Property Review, 557. 2001, European
• RODHAIN, Philippe, UDRP Does Not Apply To Bad Faith Domain Name Renewals: Part I, CircleID, 12 Mart 2003, <http://www.circleid.com/posts/print/ udrp_does_not_apply_to_bad_faith_domain_name_ renewals_part_i/> (erişim tarihi 16 Haziran 2011).
• RODHAIN, Philippe, UDRP Dilemma In Proving Bad- Faith Domain Registrations - Part III, CircleID, 08 Temmuz 2003, <http://www.circleid.com/posts/ print/udrp_dilemma_in_proving_bad_faith_domain_ registrations_part_iii/> (erişim tarihi 16 Haziran 2011)
• RUTTER, Jenni, “Online Use of Trade Marks and Domain Names”, Chris Reed and John Angel (eds), Computer Law, 6. Basım, Oxford University Press, 2007.
• Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process, The Recognition of Rights and the Use of Names in the Internet Domain Name System, Report of the Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process, 2001, report/html/report.html> (erişim atrihi 24 Haziran 2011)
• TAYLOR, David/ SEAGER, Jane, Bad faith registration and use under the UDRP: cumulative... or not?, Globe Business Publishing Ltd, 28 Eylül 2010, <http:// www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4531ec6b- 1766-487c-9707-7186e989aeb5> (erişim tarihi 07 Temmuz 2011)
• “Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy”, 1999, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, policy-24oct99.htm> (erişim atrihi 27 Haziran 2011).
• WOODARD, Elizabeth C, “The UDRP, ADR, and Arbitration: Using Proven Solutions to Address Perceived Problems with the UDRP”, 2009, Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal, Cilt: 19 Kitap: 4 1169
• Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows [2000] WIPO Case D2000-0003
• Teradyne, Inc. v. 4Tel Technology [2000] WIPO Case D2000-0026
• LIBRO AG v. NA Global Link Limited [2000] WIPO Case D 2000-0186
• MatchNet plc. v. MAC Trading [2000] WIPO Case D 2000 – 0205
• Michigan Economic Development Corporation v Paul W. Steinorth Construction, Inc. [2000] Administrative Panel Decision Under the ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution AF-0262.
• Mission KwaSizabantu v. Benjamin Rost [2000] WIPO Case D2000-0279
• Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Dow Jones LP v The Hephzibah Intro-Net Project Limited [2000] WIPO Case D2000- 0704.
• Smart Design LLC v. Carolyn HughesS [2000] WIPO Case D2000-0993, Substance Abuse Management, Inc. v. Screen Actors Modesl [sic] International, Inc. (SAMI) [2001] WIPO Case D2001-0782
• Ahmanson Land Company v. Save Open Space and Electronic Imaging Systems [2000] WIPO Case D2000-0858
• Magnum Piering, Inc. v. The Mudjackers and Garwood S. Wilson, Sr. [2000] WIPO Case D2000-1525
• Compusa Management Company v. Customized Computer Training [2000] The National Arbitration Forum Case FA0006000095082
• Scorpions Musikproductions und Verlagsgesellschaft MBH v. Alberta Hot Rods [2001] WIPO Case D2001-0787.
• Two Systems Enterprises Co, Ltd v Sonie’s Creastions [2001] WIPO eRes Case No AF-0911
• MADRID 2012, S.A. v. Scott Martin-MadridMan Websites [2003] WIPO Case D2003-0598
• PAA Laboratories GmbH v. Printing Arts America [2004] WIPO Case D2004-0338
• Sprunk-Jansen A/S v. Chesterton Holdings [2006] WIPO Case D2006-1080
• Octogen Pharmacal Company, Inc. v. Domains By Proxy, Inc. / Rich Sanders and Octogen e-Solutions [2009] WIPO Case D2009-0786
• A. Nattermann & Cie. GmbH and Sanofi-aventis v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. [2010] WIPO Case D2010-0800