Posts Tagged ‘India’
Posted October 31st, 2011
As posted to News.Dot-Nxt.com: “The Indian government has formally proposed a government takeover of the Internet at the United Nations General Assembly in New York.
In a statement sent yesterday, India argued for the creation of a new body to be called the United Nations Committee for Internet-Related Policies (CIRP) which would develop Internet policies, oversee all Internet standards bodies and policy organizations, negotiate Internet-related treaties, and act as an arbitrator in Internet-related disputes.”
Click HERE to continue reading.
Tags: CIRP, India, UN
Posted in Internet Governanace by Kelly Hardy
Posted March 24th, 2011
“After ,the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) approved .xxx suffix for pornographic websites,India announced that it will seek to block the .XXX top-level domain .
The ministry of IT issued the following statement :
“India along with many other countries from the Middle East and Indonesia opposed the grant of the domain in the first place, and we would proceed to block the whole domain, as it goes against the IT Act and Indian laws.Though some people have said that segregation is better, and some countries allow it. But for other nations transmission and direct distribution of such content goes against their moral and culture.”
Distribution of adult content is illegal in India under the Indian Penal Code.”
Click HERE to read the full article.
Tags: .xxx, India
Posted in gTLDS by Kelly Hardy
Posted April 21st, 2009
A domain name registrar in India is exploiting the rules governing proceedings under ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) to frustrate trademark owners’ efforts to retrieve domain names from cybersquatters.
The UDRP rules require trademark owners who wish to file a complaint under the policy to state that they “will submit, with respect to any challenges to a decision in the administrative proceeding canceling or transferring the domain name, to the jurisdiction of the courts in at least one specified Mutual Jurisdiction.” The defined term Mutual Jurisdiction means a court jurisdiction that covers either the relevant domain name registrar’s principal office or the domain name registrant’s address as listed in the Whois record at the time the complaint is filed. Essentially, the UDRP complainant must elect whether it will litigate a judicial challenge to the outcome of the administrative proceeding in its opponent’s home jurisdiction or in the jurisdiction of the registrar, which is usually viewed as “neutral.”
The Mutual Jurisdiction requirement enables cybersquatters to make it harder on trademark owners by selecting a registrar strategically based on location. Imagine that a cybersquatter outside the U.S. wishes to extort money from a U.S. trademark owner. If he registers an infringing domain name with a registrar in his own country, it forces the trademark owner to consent in a UDRP complaint to litigate on the cybersquatter’s home field if the cybersquatter challenges the UDRP result.
(more…)
Tags: APCA, Cybersquatters, India, Mumbai, Mutual Jurisdiciton UDRP
Posted in Cybersquatting, Enforcement, ICANN, UDRP by Deborah Wilcox
