Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Blockchain Domains: New Developments for Brand Owners
Blockchain technology has revolutionized numerous industries, including finance, supply chain management and digital identity verification. One of its latest frontiers relates to the domain name system (DNS). Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces. This article explores the issues associated with trademark protection in blockchain domain names and examines new steps and policies that blockchain domain registrars should implement to safeguard brand owners.
Traditional Domain Name Registration and Protections
Traditional DNS operates under a hierarchical structure managed by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). This centralized authority oversees domain name registrations and resolves disputes through established policies such as the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP). Developed more than 20 years ago, the UDRP was ICANN's first consensus policy and was intended to address cybersquatting in the DNS. Cybersquatting involves the registration of domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to trademarks with the intent of registering and using those names in bad faith.
The Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) was another ICANN policy development that provided crucial rights protection for the new generic top-level domain (new gTLD) program. The TMCH serves as a centralized database of verified trademarks connected to every new gTLD that launches. The TMCH authenticates rights information and supports both Sunrise registration — priority access for rights holders to request domain names associated with their trademarks — and the Trademark Claims service, which notifies rights holders after registration, allowing immediate action if an infringing domain is registered.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?