Tiếng Việt English  
Home Our People Experiences Associations Contact us
Is the Draft Law’s Article 130(1)(d) New Proposal to Surmount the Conflict Between Domain Name and Intellectual Property Right Feasible?
(Ngày đăng: 2021-04-19)

Is the Draft Law’s Article 130(1)(d) New Proposal to Surmount

the Conflict Between Domain Name and Intellectual Property Right Feasible?

 

Email: vinh@bross.vn

 

The Draft Law amending and supplementing a number of articles of the 2005 Intellectual Property Law (“Draft Law”) only adds the element "with bad intention" (the same as “bad faith” concept) to Article 130(1)(d) of the current IP Law in order to determine when the act of registration, possession or use of a domain name shall be considered as an unfair competition acts and shall be governed by the IP Law. The domain name has been a controversial issue for a long time between the Ministry of Science and Technology and Ministry of Information and Communications due to legal conflicts between the IP Law and Law on Information Technology.[1]

 

Adding the phrase "with bad intention" to Article 130(1)(d), would be not sufficient, in our opinion, to completely resolve this conflict. There are currently 2 domain name dispute resolution policies widely adopted in the world, firstly, the Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy (UDRP), and secondly, the EU. Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules (.eu ADR).

 

In order to be able to cancel or force the transfer of domain name, if a UDRP claim is adopted, the complainant must always satisfy all three conditions at the same time: (a) the domain name registered by the domain name registrant is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant (the person or entity bringing the complaint) has rights; and (b) the domain name registrant has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name in question; and (iii) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith

 

Nevertheless, according to ADR, in order to prevail an eu. domain name claim, ADR only requires that 2 conditions (a) & (b) above be satisfied while condition (c) is completely optional.

The .vn domain name dispute resolution policy suggested by the VNNIC that is available in Article 76 of the Law Information Technology is to follow the UDRP administered by the WIPO and ICANN while it is not clear that which approach in Article 130(1)(d) is being supplemented: UDRP or ADR?. This is the cause of the debate and conflict between the IP Law and the Law on Information Technology.

 

For the reason, should the Drafting Committee consider adding more amendment options to point d, paragraph 1, Article 130?. In particular, we suggest that it is possible to choose: (a) to legislate three conditions of UDRP into point d, paragraph 1, article 130; or (b) to prioritize the choice of applicable law, for example, it can be added to Clause 2, Article 5 of the IP Law as follows:

 

“In case the domain name subject to a dispute or subject to an administrative violation is determined to be identical with or confusingly similar to, a protected industrial property rights in Vietnam, related parties have the right to request competent agencies to apply the provisions of this IP Law to settle”.

 

Bross & Partners, a renowned and qualified Patent, Design, Trademark and Copyright agent of Vietnam, is ranked as Tier 1 by the Legal 500 Asia Pacific. Bross & Partners is constantly recommended by the Managing Intellectual Property (MIP), World Trademark Review (WTR), AsiaLaw Profiles, Asia IP and Asian Legal Business. Bross & Partners, is providing clients all over the world with the reliable, affordable contentious and non-contentious IP services including enforcement, anti-counterfeiting,  litigation regarding trademark, trade name, industrial design, patent, copyright and domain name.

 

Should you have needs, please contact us at Email: vinh@bross.vn; Mobile: 0903 287 057; WeChat: Vinhbross2603; WhatsApp: +84903287057; Skype: vinh.bross; Zalo: +84903287057.

 

 

 


[1] See more “THE DEMERITS OF 4 MEASURES OR ALTERNATIVES OF DOMAIN NAME .VN DISPUTE RESOLUTION UNDER THE VIETNAMESE CURRENT LAWS AND REGULATIONS YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW”: http://bross.vn/newsletter/ip-news-update/THE-DEMERITS-OF-4-MEASURES-OR-ALTERNATIVES-OF-DOMAIN-NAME-VN-DISPUTE-RESOLUTION-UNDER-THE-VIETNAMESE-CURRENT-LAWS-AND-REGULATIONS-YOU-MIGHT-NOT-KNOW

 

Bookmark and Share
Relatednews
9 THINGS YOU SHOULD AVOID WHEN NAMING AND REGISTERING A TRADEMARK IN VIETNAM
9 điều nên tránh khi đặt tên thương hiệu ở Việt Nam
United States of America Trademark Protection System Like no Other You May not Know
Đăng ký nhãn hiệu (thương hiệu) ở Hoa Kỳ
Comment on the Proposed Amendments of the preamble of Article 74(2) in the Draft Law amending the IP Law
Nhìn nhanh thủ tục phản đối cấp bảo hộ nhãn hiệu theo pháp luật Úc
Bình luận về đề xuất ở Dự thảo Luật sửa đổi Luật SHTT liên quan đến điểm h khoản 2 điều 74 và tên khoản 2 điều 74
Thay đổi điều kiện hành nghề đại diện sở hữu công nghiệp trong Dự thảo Luật sửa đổi Luật SHTT liệu có hơi vội vàng?
Bross & Partners giúp "Phở Thìn 13 Lò Đúc" hủy bỏ nhãn hiệu Phở Thìn 13 Lò Đúc ở Hoa Kỳ do một cá nhân Hàn Quốc đăng ký
Đề xuất mới về giải quyết xung đột giữa tên miền với quyền sở hữu trí tuệ ở Điều 130 dự thảo Luật sửa đổi Luật SHTT liệu có khả thi?

Newsletter
Guidelines
Doing business in Vietnam
Intellectual Property in Vietnam
International Registrations
Copyright © Bross & Partners All rights reserved.

         
Cửa thép vân gỗcua thep van go