[process2-comments] Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process

 WIPO2 RFC-1 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON TERMS OF REFERENCE, PROCEDURES AND TIMETABLE FOR THE SECOND WIPO INTERNET DOMAIN NAME PROCESS In view of the Request for Comments (RFC) for the Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process, the Brazilian Association of Intellectual Property - ABPI would like to submit the following comments and recommendations, based on the expertise of its members in major intellectual property issues which have been arising from the development of the Internet, and current domain name disputes caused by the tension between domain names, trademarks and other protected rights. Scope of Issues in the Second WIPO Process: We recommend that a few other areas should be added to the discussions related to the issues that can be raised in the current domain name system, in order to enforce the protection granted for intellectual property rights and other protected rights. The proposed scope was considered by our group as still limited, reason why we agree with the topics already listed through this RFC, but strongly recommend that the following further areas should be included in this study and consultation, for the consideration of both the intellectual property and the Internet communities: Names of characters and titles of intellectual works in general which are subject to copyright protection; - Conflicts involving domain names which were abusively registered; - Domain names which could be used in order to tarnish the reputation of a trademark or a company, or as a part of any unfair competition practices; - Other names or designations which should not be registrable as domain names because they belong to public domain. Personal Names: We believe that protection against abusive registration as a domain name in the gTLDs should be accorded not only to personal names in general, but also to famous and well-known nicknames (E.g.: Pelé, used by Edson Arantes do Nascimento), artistic names (E.g. : 2PAC, used by Tupac Shakur) or pseudonyms. International Nonproprietary Names (INNs) for Pharmaceutical Substances: Our group agrees with the protection against abusive registration as a domain name to INNs, but would like to express our concern as to whether this protection should be limited to the World Health Organization's list of protected INNs, or should also cover translations of the names which identify each pharmaceutical substance or ingredient. (E.g., ampicillin, in Portuguese, means "ampicilina"- both names carry some resemblance but are graphically different. If "ampicilina.com" happens to be registered, possible damages would occur involving Portuguese-speaking consumers ). In addition, some consideration should also be given as to whether or not new INNs gTLDs should be created to protect INNS. Names of international intergovernmental organizations: Our Group also agrees that protection against abusive registration as a domain name should cover the names and acronyms of international intergovernmental and regional organizations, as well as Non-governmental International Organizations (NGOs). Our Group understands that a significant number of NGOs, particularly the ones which are involved in fundraising activities, may deserve special protection against abusive and bad faith domain name registrations, regardless of whether these NGOs already acquired trademark rights in their country of origin or other countries. In addition, some consideration should also be given as to whether or not national governmental organizations should be protected against abusive and bad faith domain name registrations. Geographical indications, geographical terms, or indications of source: Our Group agrees that the geographical indications, geographical terms and indications of source which are eligible for receiving protection under the Paris Convention, Madrid Agreement, Lisbon Agreement or the TRIPS Agreement should also deserve protection against abusive registration as a domain name in the gTLDs. However, our Group has expressed some concern as to how such protection should be granted and believes that this topic should be added to the List of Issues. Our Association congratulates WIPO for the quality of the report prepared as well as the excellent "List Of Issues" which involve each covered topic. Except as noted herein, our Group understands that the questions raised in the "List Of Issues" for each topic included in this RFC are sufficiently broad to address all pertinent subjects, reason why they should also be used in connection with the additional areas that our group believe are important to broaden the interface between intellectual property and other protected rights and the current domain name system. Rio de Janeiro, September 15, 2000 Brazilian Association of Intellectual Property - ABPI Esther M. Flesch - General Rapporteur