CIRA implements revised CDRP Policy and Rules

The CIRA Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (CDRP), which has been in effect since 2002, is a forum which is intended to provide quick, out-of-court arbitrations at relatively low cost for .CA domain names registered in bad faith

Last summer, CIRA (The Canadian Internet Registration Authority), held a public consultation on it’s CDRP to gather information and feedback on the effectiveness of the CDRP, and to determine whether this Policy continues to meet the needs of its stakeholders. In response to the submissions from the consultation, CIRA made recommendations and proposed changes to the CDRP, inviting further comments from .CA owners during the spring of 2011.

Last week CIRA announced the implementation of a revised CDRP Policy and Rules to take effect August 22, 2011.

Many of the Policies and Rules were updated to mirror those found in ICANN’s UDRP (Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy) to bring the rules and policies in line with Top Level domain names and other ccTLDs. Some elements of the CDRP that have changed include:

•    “Rights” and “Use” of a Trademark Removed. CIRA has removed the provisions in the CDRP Policy relating to “rights” and “use” of a mark. CIRA is of the view that these provisions have created overly technical and complex requirements in terms of qualifying for protection. This change will bring the CDRP in line on this issue with the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) used for top-level domain names, as well as dispute resolution processes of other major ccTLD registries.

•    Clarification of “Confusingly Similar” Test. It has been clarified in the CDRP Policy that when determining whether a domain name is “Confusingly Similar” to a mark, the narrow resemblance test should be applied. The narrow resemblance test has been applied to most CDRP decisions, rather than the broader traditional test for confusion in trademark law, on the basis that the CDRP is not well suited to the kinds of factual determinations involved in a conventional confusion analysis applied in trademark disputes. CIRA has clarified this to ensure that all Panelists use the same test when determining whether a domain name is “Confusingly Similar” to a mark.

•    Bad Faith / Legitimate Interest Factors to be Non-Exhaustive. The list of bad faith and legitimate interest factors are now non-exhaustive. CIRA believes that the previous approach of having an exhaustive list was too restrictive and is in favour of adopting the non-exhaustive list as used in the UDRP.

More Information

For complete details about the new changes to the CDRP please visit CIRA’s recent release CIRA implements revised CDRP Policy and Rules.
To review the CDRP in it’s entirety please visit: http://www.cira.ca/legal/cdrp/