DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION Domain Name Dispute Resolution5 2.1 Legalframework The Dutch legal framework does not provide in a definition of "cy bersquatting' domain name warehousing"or any other, related term. Nor is there specific legislation in the Netherlands regarding the registration and/or use of domain names Against the registration of a domain name one can however act on the basis of trademark law trade name lawand tort 2.1.1 Trademark A trademark owner can act against a cyber squatter on the basis of the Benelux Trademark Act(BTA), art. 13, section 1, subsection d BTA If the Applicant/domain name grabber has registered a domain name that conta ns a Benelux trademark (a trade mark that is registered in the Benelux trademark register) or a similar sign, the trade mark owner can actagainst the registration if (i) the Applicant has no valid reason to use the doma in name. A valid reason is not assumed lightly. Only if the Applicant has such a need to use that specific name that it can reasonably not be expected of hm to use an other name, a valid reason is assumed(e.g. the use of a trade name by the Applicant before the date of the trade mark registration) (ii)the Applicant uses the domain name commercially (e.g. offers it for sale or offers goods or services on or through it ) One should note that the mere registration of a domain name by an Applicant is considered to be ercial use in dutch case lay (iii) the use of the doma in name can cause the Applicant unjust advantage or can delude on the distinguishing power of the trade mark. Because of the mportant function of a doma in name as an advertisement property, the sterdam Court of Appeals ruled that the blocking of possibility to register its trade mark as a domain name deludes the distinguishing power of the trade mark. 7 Typo-squatting is considered to be trademark infringement. In the Name Space casea many trademarks with minor misspellings were registered by defendant, who was This chapter relates pr mary to domain named ispute resolution procedures n the Nether lands but also touches upon procedures regarding General Top Level Domains(gTLD s)or conflicts m other ccTLD's which have a lnk wth the Netherlands (eg trademark owner s a res dent of the Nether lands and the doman name dispute relates to the registration and/or use of the corresponding domainname in the ccTLDofa neighbouring country ) 6 Pres. Rechtbank Amhem 25 October 1999, Computerrecht 2000-1, p. 56(KLM&Alitalia MMorelino); Pres. Rechtank Amsterdam 8 July 1999, DomJur 2002-123 (Draka/Jansen) 7 Hof Amsterdam I 1 January 2001, DomJur 2001-1 14(Elsevier/ Chaos) Hof Arnhem 3 1 January 2001, DomJur 2001-83(Akrose a/Name Space) 7DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION 7 2 Domain Name Dispute Resolution5 2.1 Legal framework The Dutch legal framework does not provide in a definition of “cybersquatting”, “domain name warehousing” or any other, related term. Nor is there specific legislation in the Netherlands regarding the registration and/or use of domain names. Against the registration of a domain name one can however act on the basis of trademark law, trade name law and tort. 2.1.1 Trademark A trademark owner can act against a cyber squatter on the basis of the Benelux Trademark Act (“BTA”), art. 13, section 1, subsection d BTA. If the Applicant/domain name grabber has registered a domain name that contains a Benelux trademark (a trade mark that is registered in the Benelux trademark register) or a similar sign, the trade mark owner can act against the registration if: (i) the Applicant has no valid reason to use the domain name. A valid reason is not assumed lightly. Only if the Applicant has such a need to use that specific name that it can reasonably not be expected of him to use an other name, a valid reason is assumed (e.g. the use of a trade name by the Applicant before the date of the trade mark registration) (ii) the Applicant uses the domain name commercially (e.g. offers it for sale or offers goods or services on or through it ). One should note that the mere registration of a domain name by an Applicant is considered to be (threatening) commercial use in Dutch case law.6 (iii) the use of the domain name can cause the Applicant unjust advantage or can delude on the distinguishing power of the trade mark. Because of the important function of a domain name as an advertisement property, the Amsterdam Court of Appeals ruled tha t the mere blocking of the possibility to register its trade mark as a domain name deludes the distinguishing power of the trade mark.7 Typo-squatting is considered to be trademark infringement. In the Name Space case8 many trademarks with minor misspellings were registered by defendant, who was 5. This chapter relates primary to domain name dispute resolution procedures in the Netherlands, but also touches upon procedures regarding General Top Level Domains (gTLD’s) or conflicts in other ccTLD’s which have a link with the Netherlands (e.g. trademark owner is a resident of the Netherlands and the domain name dispute relates to the registration and/or use of the corresponding domain name in the ccTLD of a neighbouring country). 6. Pres. Rechtbank Arnhem 25 October 1999, Computerrecht 2000-1, p. 56 (KLM&Alitalia /Morelino); Pres. Rechtbank Amsterdam 8 July 1999, DomJur 2002-123 (Draka/Jansen). 7. Hof Amsterdam 11 January 2001, DomJur 2001-114 (Elsevier/Chaos). 8. Hof Arnhem 31 January 2001, DomJur 2001-83 (Akros e.a./Name Space)