Thursday, July 25, 2024

International Filing System Has Few Flaws!

 

If we can have copyright reciprocal treaties, why can’t that be the case for patents, trademarks, domain disputes without WIPO being involved? It’s understandable that everything comes down to how the payment at the local prosecution would be made, and as of course, the countries who file for most of patent and trademark applications, or domain name disputes, would end up having control over the arguments and legal nitty-gritties being embedded into the global system. And why the present system not fully serves the point of being contending for uniqueness in the World, without having so much of obstructions, in terms of both prosecution and cost involved. And of course, I’m not soliciting pro-bono. But a system, where uniqueness can evolve without limiting its scope to take action against anyone who adapts, derives, copies, infringe, pass off without permission.

Firstly, why the UDRP/INDRP are restricted to mere Cybersquatting cases only, that’s the issue? Shouldn’t the domain name not granted initially only, if in case, any similar or same domain name is registered both with the gtld and cctld domain names? Like, if you’ve one .com domain name and one .us or .au. or .in domain name registered, then these domain names should be locked in the name of that registrant only, if in case more than more than two letters in the same or jumbled sequence are applied in the newly registration of the domain name. If not, then restricting the domain name disputes merely for cybersquatting, actually defeats the purpose and process of the existence of WIPO or INDRP.

Let’s take further example, from the EU & US perspective, the fees for electing a single panelist is around 1,500 USD, and when that’s being paid in those currencies, it might feel, acceptable. Now convert that money into from the Indian Rupees or Yen or Yuan perspective, + additional fees of the attorneys on record are going to be charged. What is the issue in this is, and as the case of Domain Name Disputes are on the basis of first come first serve, and further, only in case of the cybersquatting, the cases both in the UDRP or cctld (INDRP) can be filed; which again, I oppose, as the domain  name is the identity of any individual, and whether it’s related to trademark or not, one should be allowed to approach both the UDRP or INDRP. The problem comes when the fees w.r.t. non-trademark cases are involved, and hence the above analogy is given.

But how would that work? I’ve a theory.

Would the reciprocal treaties alike TRIPS, BERNE etc. may help in reaching the conclusions?

One can approach directly within 6 Months or 12 Months as per Article 4 of the Paris Convention, in case of TM, PAT. Whilst for domain names, it should be open for all. Let there be a mutually acceptable initial fees involved. Now, the applicant can apply the application by himself/herself without being mandatory for hiring of any local attorney or agent.

If in case any objection is being raised by the office of origin, then only the Applicant needs to hire or give an address of service within that territory, and then the local laws would take its own course. And if the application is not in order, then the fees shall NOT be reimbursed, because that would make sure that no vague and bogus applications are be filed.  

What I’ve elucidated above, is the summary of what we are doing VIA WIPO too. Correct or Not? Why grab a nose by encircling your entire face VIA head, instead of directly touching it.

Think about it.

© Pranav Chaturvedi

No comments:

Post a Comment

Why DATA Principal Was Even Defined In DPDP? My Dilemma!

  I’m sure after reading this blog, you would think, I’m raising unwarranted, unwanted, out of the context, issues & definitions. But...