Executive summary

• Author: Paulovics, Ivett
• Pages: 4-9

STUDY ON EVALUATION OF PRACTICES FOR COMBATING SPECULATIVE AND ABUSIVE DOMAIN NAME

REGISTRATIONS

4

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This study (Study) was commissioned by the European Commission to evaluate the

practices aimed at preventing and fighting speculative and abusive .eu domain name

registrations, in particular those related to the infringement of previously recognised rights.

The Study assesses in particular:

 The .eu Registry’s collaborations with the European Union Intellectual Property

Office (EUIPO), Europol and other European Union agencies;

 The .eu registration procedure;

 The .eu Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism in place for the

resolution of domain name disputes.

For the purpose of the Study, speculative and abusive registration is defined as a domain

name registration identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right is

recognised or established by national and/or Community law and where it: (a) has been

registered by its holder with no right or legitimate interest associated with said name; or

(b) has been registered or is being used in bad faith.1 Protected rights include, inter alia,

registered national and community trade marks, geographical indications or designations

of origin, and, insofar as they are protected under national law in the Member State where

they are held: unregistered trade marks, trade names, business identifiers, company

names, family names, and distinctive titles of protected literary and artistic works (all

together intellectual property rights – IPR).2 According to Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No

874/2004, speculative and abusive registrations shall be subject of revocation, using the

.eu ADR proceeding or a judicial procedure initiated by the rightsholders.

Internet is without doubt a facilitator f or IPR infringement.3 4 The number of .eu domain

name disputes filed with the .eu ADR providers5 represents t he mere tip of the iceberg

and does not reflect the full extent of the phenomenon of speculative and abusive

registrations, including but not limited to cybersquatting6, in the .eu TLD. In some cases,

businesses, especially small and medium enterprises (SMEs), do not take action due to

the lack of awareness on the infringement and/or on the measures available for the

enforcement of their IPR or for other reasons (e.g., they consider taking action complex,

not affordable or inconvenient). Others reach amicable settlement agreements or simply

acquire the abusive domain name from the registrant, one of the main outcomes

cybersquatters seek. Some cases are brought before courts, especially when the

rightsholders aspire to obtain damages. Finally, in cases where other types of abuses

(fake registration data, impersonation, scam, malware distribution, phishing, copyright

infringement, trade mark infringement within the website content, etc.) are connected to

speculative and abusive registrations, domain names might be subject to investigation

1 This definition is in line with Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 874/2004. Broader definitions of speculative and abusive

registrations exist both in literature and practice.

2 Article 10(1) of Regulation (EC) No 874/2004

3 EUIPO 2019 Status Report on IPR Infringement: https://euipo.europa.eu/tunnel-

web/secure/webdav/guest/document_library/observatory/documents/reports/2019_Status_Report_on_IPR_infringement/

2019_Status_Report_on_IPR_infringement_en.pdf

4 EUIPO Research on Online Business Models Infringing Intellectual Property Rights – Phase 2:

https://euipo.europa.eu/tunnel-

web/secure/webdav/guest/document_library/observatory/documents/reports/Research_on_Online_Business_Models_Inf

ringing_IP_Rights.pdf

5 Total number of ADR proceedings in 2017: 66, 2018: 71, 2019: 54

6 Cybersquatting is defined by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) as bad faith

registration of another's trade mark in a domain name: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/cybersquatting-2013-05-

03-en