PROGRAM 7 ARBITRATION, MEDIATION AND DOMAIN NAMES
Program Manager Mr. J. Sandage
OVERVIEW OF PROGRESS IN 2014
-
The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (WIPO Center) is recognized as a global resource for timely and cost effective alternatives to court litigation of IP disputes, acting as a provider of legal and organizational expertise and as an administrator of cases. This also includes the provision of services for Internet domain name disputes.
-
Building on the findings of the WIPO Center’s 2013 International Survey on Dispute Resolution in International Technology Transactions, the WIPO Center in 2014 worked to optimize the potential of its procedures to meet the needs of IP right holders and users. The WIPO Center also held tailored and regular arbitration and mediation workshops.
-
The WIPO Center actively managed WIPO cases in different IP areas using up-to-date case administration infrastructure, in particular the WIPO Electronic Case Facility (ECAF). Following international consultations, the WIPO Center developed and launched revised WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Rules20. Effective June 1, 2014, these Rules incorporate recent developments in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), enhancing the basis for proceedings that are time and cost efficient.
-
National courts and competition authorities in some jurisdictions have been encouraging parties involved in standards-related disputes involving telecom patents in multiple jurisdictions to resolve such disputes through mediation and arbitration. As a result, 2014 saw an increase in the number of party queries regarding the use of WIPO’s tailored agreements to refer a dispute concerning fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing terms to WIPO Mediation and Arbitration.
-
In 2014, the WIPO Center concluded Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) with the Spanish Franchisors Association (AEF), the National Copyright Directorate of Colombia (DNDA), the Directorate General of Intellectual Property Rights of Indonesia (DGIPR), the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI), and the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL), adding to existing Member State collaborations. These collaborations concern the development of optional ADR frameworks that provide cost-effective and flexible options for parties to resolve their disputes before such Offices in relation to pending applications or granted rights.
-
The WIPO Center continued to strive to provide leadership in the development of ADR solutions in relation to the unauthorized use of IP on the Internet. WIPO continued to engage in IP-related policy activity in relation to the introduction, in 2013, by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) of up to 1,400 new generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs). In 2014, the WIPO Center implemented the ICANN Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure, a trademark-based mechanism aiming to encourage responsible registry operator conduct once a domain has become operational.
-
The year 2014 marked the 15th anniversary of the WIPO-developed Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). Since the WIPO Center administered the first UDRP case in 1999, total WIPO case filings in 2014 passed the 30,000 mark (27,189 gTLD and 3,134 ccTLD cases), encompassing almost 57,000 domain names. In 2014, cybersquatting case filings with WIPO increased by 2 per cent from the 2013 level, with 2,634 cases concerning 5,591 domain names lodged by trademark owners alleging abuse of their mark. This included the first UDRP cases in relation to registrations in new gTLDs.
-
The WIPO Center liaised with the administrators of country code Top-Level Domains (ccTLDs) in different regions in relation to dispute resolution policies. In 2014, the WIPO Center became a provider for the .VG (Virgin Islands (British)) and .GQ (Equatorial Guinea) domains, bringing the total of ccTLDs, for which WIPO provides such services, to 72.
-
The design, planning and implementation of WIPO Center activities were informed and guided by the relevant DA Recommendations, in particular Recommendations 1, 6 and 10. Notably, this concerned the WIPO Center’s organization of tailor made arbitration and mediation programs for IP officials and practitioners, assistance to IP Offices in establishing optional ADR frameworks for disputes pending before them, and assistance to ccTLD authorities in the establishment of best registry practices and dispute resolution mechanisms, as relevant to developing countries and countries with economies in transition.
PERFORMANCE DATA
Expected Result: II.8 International and domestic intellectual property disputes are increasingly prevented or resolved through WIPO mediation, arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution methods
|
Performance Indicators
|
Baselines
|
Targets
|
Performance Data
|
TLS
|
Increased consideration of the use of alternative dispute resolution services in intellectual property transactions, including through the use of WIPO procedures
|
Updated Baseline end 2013: 375 disputes and 95 bons offices (cumulative per end 2013)
4,000 incoming queries (2012/13)
3.5 million Web visits (2012/13)
408 participants at Center standard events (2012/13)
4,000 participants at Center external events (2012/13)
Original Baseline P&B 2014/15: 284 disputes and 79 bons offices (cumulative per end 2012)
4,000 incoming queries (2010/11)
Web visits 30 million (cumulative per end 2012)
276 participants at Center standard events (2010/11);
3,000 participants at Center external events (2010/11)
|
40 additional disputes and bons offices
4,000 additional queries
3.5 million additional visits
250 participants at Center standard events
6,000 participants at Center external events
|
18 additional disputes and 53 additional bons offices (2014)
3,725 additional incoming queries (2014)
1.553 million Web visits (2014)
138 participants at Center events (2014)
4,300 participants at events involving Center representation (2014)
|
On track
|
Alternative dispute resolution policies to the development and implementation of which policies the Center has contributed
|
Updated Baseline end 2013: 10 schemes adopted (AGICOA, EGEDA, ETSI, Film and Media, ICOM, INPI-BR, IPAG, IPOS(M), IPOS(ED), ITPGRFA) (cumulative per end 2013)
Original Baseline P&B 2014/15: 6 schemes adopted (AGICOA, EGEDA, Film and Media, ICOM, IPOS, ITPGRFA) (cumulative per end 2012)
|
1 to 3 additional schemes
|
5 additional schemes adopted (AEF, DGIPR, DNDA, IMPI, IPOPHL)
|
On track
|
Expected Result: II.9 Effective intellectual property protection in the gTLDs and the ccTLDs
|
Performance Indicators
|
Baselines
|
Targets
|
Performance Data
|
TLS
|
No. of gTLD UDRP cases administered
|
Updated Baseline end 2013: 24,901 gTLD cases administered by the Center(cumulative per end 2013)
Original Baseline P&B 2014/15: 22,644 gTLD cases administered by the Center(cumulative per end 2012)
|
3,000 additional cases
|
2,288 gTLD additional cases (2014)
(27,189 gTLD cases cumulative)
|
On track
|
Performance Indicators
|
Baselines
|
Targets
|
Performance Data
|
TLS
|
No. of ccTLD UDRP based cases administered
|
Updated Baseline end 2013: 2,788 ccTLD-only cases administered by the Center (cumulative per end 2013)
Original Baseline P&B 2014/15: 2,470 ccTLD-only cases administered by the Center (cumulative per end 2012
|
350 additional cases
|
346 additional ccTLD-only cases (2014)
(3,134 cumulative)
|
On track
|
Dispute resolution policies in the Domain Name System to the development and implementation of which policies the Center has contributed
|
Updated Baseline end 2013: UDRP, Pre-Delegation Dispute Resolution Policy, Trademark Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (cumulative per end 2013)
Original Baseline P&B 2014/15: UDRP, Pre-Delegation Dispute Resolution Policy (cumulative per end 2012)
|
Implementation in the Domain Name System of WIPO policy and process recommendations
|
Continued applicability of UDRP, ICANN Pre-Delegation Dispute Resolution Policy, ICANN Trademark Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (cumulative per end 2014); no additional policies or recommendations to be implemented.
|
On track
|
No. of ccTLD administrators with WIPO assisted design or administration of intellectual property protection mechanisms in accordance with international standards
|
Updated Baseline end 2013: 70 ccTLD administrators (cumulative per end 2013)
Original Baseline P&B 2014/15: 67 ccTLD administrators (cumulative per end 2012)
|
Four new administrators
|
2 new administrators (.GQ, .VG) (2014)
(72 cumulative)
|
On track
|
RESOURCE UTILIZATION
Budget and Actual Expenditure (by result)
(in thousands of Swiss francs)
Budget and Actual Expenditure (personnel and non-personnel)
(in thousands of Swiss francs)
NOTE: The 2014/15 Budget after Transfers reflects transfers as of March 31, 2015 to address needs during the 2014/15 biennium in line with Financial Regulation 5.5.
A. Budget after Transfers 2014/15
-
The increase in resources under ER II.8 (International and domestic IP disputes) reflects a shift in the Center’s personnel resources to better manage the demand for WIPO’s ADR Services.
B. Budget utilization 2014
-
Budget utilization is within the expected range of 40-60 per cent for the first year of the biennium and is on track.
Share with your friends: |
