查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 論〈.tw〉網域名稱爭議處理機制中「註冊人惡意註冊或使用網域名稱」之實務見解
- 網域名稱Whois資料正確性之促進
- 網域名稱的搶註問題
- 通用姓氏挑戰網域名稱登記風險?--Avery Dennison v.Sumpton案例介紹
- 網域名稱在臺灣的法律保護問題
- 資訊時代商標與網域名稱之保護與不公平競爭之防止
- 網域名稱(Domain Name)之保護及不公平競爭之防止問題
- 從ICANN(The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers)的成形與發展看網際網路公共資源分配和標準制定統籌管理機制的政策與法律問題--一九九八至二○○一年的國際趨勢觀察和省思
- 商標減損法制之評析--由美國法觀點
- 網域名稱爭議類型之各國立法例與美國最新案例發展
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 論〈.tw〉網域名稱爭議處理機制中「註冊人惡意註冊或使用網域名稱」之實務見解=The "Bad Faith" Requirement in Registration or Use of Domain Names by the Registrant in 〈.tw〉 Domain Name Dispute Resolution |
---|---|
作 者 | 周天; | 書刊名 | 科技法律評析 |
卷 期 | 1 2008.06[民97.06] |
頁 次 | 頁1-51 |
分類號 | 588.36、588.36 |
關鍵詞 | 網域名稱; 網域名稱爭議處理制度; 臺灣網路資訊中心; Domain name; Domain name dispute resolution; Taiwan network information center; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 不論 UDRP 或是爭議處理辦法,其制訂目的皆在於處理註冊人各種「惡意」註冊或使用網域名稱之情形。科技法律中心所處理的〈.tw〉網域名稱爭議案件中,專家小組實務見解認為,註冊人是否構成「惡意註冊」或「惡意使用」網域名稱,應予以區別,且註冊人註冊或使用網域名稱是否具有「惡意」?成為網域名稱爭議處理的核心所在,亦是網域名稱爭議案件申訴是否成立之關鍵。 爭議處理辦法及爭議處理實施要點,二者均未就「惡意註冊」或「惡意使用」網域名稱加以定義,惟專家小組實務見解依據爭議處理辦法第 3 條第 1 項及第 5 條第 3 項之規定,認定「惡意註冊」或「惡意使用」網域名稱,係指以「不正當之目的」註冊或使用該系爭網域名稱,因此,申訴人應主張並舉證證明,註冊人於註冊或使用該系爭網域名稱時,具有「不正當之目的」。 惟「不正當之目的」係一不確定的法律概念,有賴專家小組在具體個案事實中加以認定,科技法律中心所處理的近百件〈.tw〉網域名稱爭議案件中,專家小組實務見解,雖然仍存在少數的不同意見,但是已經逐漸形成多數通說,多數通說認為「不正當之目的」,其認定應採註冊人「主觀意識」及「客觀結果事實」雙重認定標準。 專家小組實務見解並認為,註冊人是否具有「不正當之目的」?應參酌雙方當事人所提出之證據及其他一切資料,依據爭議處理辦法第 5 條第 3 項之規定,參酌該項所列之各款情形,就個案特定事實加以認定。惟專家小組實務見解認為,註冊人「惡意註冊」或「惡意使用」網域名稱之情形,不以該項所列之各款情形為限,尚包括其他以「不正當目的」惡意註冊或惡意使用網域名稱的情形。 故為求明確,本文建議爭議處理辦法第 5 條第 3 項新增該項第5款「其他惡意註冊或使用該網域名稱之情形」,以為完備。如此,註冊人如有違反商標法第 62 條規定「視為侵害商標權」之情形,專家小組自得適用上述新增第 5 款之規定加以處理。 |
英文摘要 | The purpose of UDRP and the domain name dispute resolution policy of Taiwan Network Information Center is to resolve the domain name disputes arising from registration or use of domain names by the registrant in“bad faith”. The expert panels of Science and Technology Law Center of the Institute for Information Industry have held in domain name dispute cases that there is a distinction between registration and use of domain names by the registrant in“bad faith” and that the“bad faith” requirement is the core issue of a domain name dispute case. The“bad faith” requirement is defined neither by the domain name dispute resolution policy of Taiwan Network Information Center nor by its rules. According to Section 1 of Article of 3 and Section 3 of Article 5 of the policy, the expert panels have held that the“bad faith” requirement is met if the complainant has proved that the registrant has an“improper motive” in either registration or use of the domain name. To understand the boundaries of the meaning of an“improper motive” in either registration or use of the domain name by the registrant, we have to turn to the opinions of the expert panels of Science and Technology Law Center of the Institute for Information Industry, who have rendered decisions in nearly 100 domain name dispute cases in Taiwan. Subject to some discenting opinions, a majority opinion has been formed over the time that a two-pronged test involving the subjective mind of the registrant and the objective results will apply in deciding whether there is an“improper motive” in either registration or use of the domain name by the registrant. The expert panels have also held that in deciding whether an“improper motive” exists on the part of the registrant, the panel has to consider the evidence provided by the both parties and other related information under the circumstances of each case. For the purposes of the evidence of an “improper motive”, the panel is not bound by the circumstances promulgated in Section 3 of Article 5 of the policy and is free to find the registrant’s“improper motive” based upon evidence disclosed in each case. 【~P. 3】 Therefore, a modification has been proposed by this paper to Section 3 of Article 5 of the policy to add a new clause that includes other circumstances that show registration or use of domain names by the registrant in“bad faith”. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。