지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
As the Internet has become an important medium for business, it has become very important to have the right domain name. A simple and inexpensive registration process, combined with the low cost of maintaining domain name rights, however, has provided many people with the opportunity to engage In cybersquatting. In general, cybersquatting is the practice of registering or using a
domain name in which others have legitimate interests, and then attempting to sell the name either to the trademark owner or to the highest bidder. This practice has caused serious problems for many trademark holders who seek to establish a web presence that is readily identifiable with their trademarks.
Given the limitations of trademark infringement actions in cybersquatting cases, many trademark owners relied on dilution claims to combat cybersquatters. The critical issue in these claims was to determine whether the mark at issue was famous. Commercial use of domain names was also difficult to prove in most cybersquatting cases.
Congress enacted The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACP A) to clarify the rights of trademark owners in response to concerns about the limitations of existing trademark law in dealing with cybersquatters. Under the ACP A, a defendant is liable if, with bad faith intent to profit, he registers, traffics in, or uses a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to a mark that is either distinctive or famous at the time the domain name is registered. While the ACP A expands the application of trademark law in the context of the Internet, it is properly limited to acts with a bad faith intent to profit from others' marks.
In Korea domain name disputes are addressed primarily through trademark infringement or dilution actions. The Ministry of Information and Communication announced Sept. 30, 2002 that it has drafted a bill to protect Internet domains and their lawful users from abuse. If enacted, the act would strictly ban cybersQuatting and other similar illicit activities, the ministry noted. The bill has received mixed reviews. Some people say that the bill eliminates loopholes in traditional trademark law by creating a legal tool aimed at cybersQuatters. Other people stress that the bill broadens traditional trademark law and creates chilling effects on freedom of speech. In my opinion, to balance trademark rights with domain name rights, many revisions of the bill must be made.
domain name in which others have legitimate interests, and then attempting to sell the name either to the trademark owner or to the highest bidder. This practice has caused serious problems for many trademark holders who seek to establish a web presence that is readily identifiable with their trademarks.
Given the limitations of trademark infringement actions in cybersquatting cases, many trademark owners relied on dilution claims to combat cybersquatters. The critical issue in these claims was to determine whether the mark at issue was famous. Commercial use of domain names was also difficult to prove in most cybersquatting cases.
Congress enacted The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACP A) to clarify the rights of trademark owners in response to concerns about the limitations of existing trademark law in dealing with cybersquatters. Under the ACP A, a defendant is liable if, with bad faith intent to profit, he registers, traffics in, or uses a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to a mark that is either distinctive or famous at the time the domain name is registered. While the ACP A expands the application of trademark law in the context of the Internet, it is properly limited to acts with a bad faith intent to profit from others' marks.
In Korea domain name disputes are addressed primarily through trademark infringement or dilution actions. The Ministry of Information and Communication announced Sept. 30, 2002 that it has drafted a bill to protect Internet domains and their lawful users from abuse. If enacted, the act would strictly ban cybersQuatting and other similar illicit activities, the ministry noted. The bill has received mixed reviews. Some people say that the bill eliminates loopholes in traditional trademark law by creating a legal tool aimed at cybersQuatters. Other people stress that the bill broadens traditional trademark law and creates chilling effects on freedom of speech. In my opinion, to balance trademark rights with domain name rights, many revisions of the bill must be made.
목차
1. 서론
2. 미국법에 대한 검토
3. 우리법에 대한 검토
4. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
도메인이름의 法的 性質과 登錄人의 權利保護에 관한 硏究
기업법연구
2006 .03
-
상표의 보호와 표현의 자유
중앙법학
2007 .10
-
상표권 남용의 성립요건에 관한 대법원 판례의 검토
민사법의 이론과 실무
2013 .01
-
중국의 근대 상표제도에 관한 소고
동북아법연구
2018 .01
-
상표와 상호 사이의 법률적 관계에 관한 연구
法學論文集
2016 .01
-
소비자오인상표 규제제도 개선방안 연구
법과 정책연구
2009 .01
-
상표법상의 손해배상제도의 문제점과 그 해결방안
법학연구
2002 .12
-
성명을 사용한 도메인이름의 분쟁양상과 분쟁해결방안
경영법률
2010 .01
-
A Comparative Study on Obligations of the Franchisor and the Franchisee Regarding Trademarks under Korea and USA Law
무역연구
2017 .01
-
중국 상표법상 등록과 무효에 관한 연구 : ‘마이클 조단’ 행정판결을 중심으로
무역상무연구
2016 .02
-
중국 상표법상 선사용 항변에 관한 연구
무역학회지
2016 .06
-
중국의 상표사용허가계약의 중첩체결에 관한 연구
무역상무연구
2017 .02
-
상표패러디의 법적취급에 관한 비교법적 연구
경영법률
2011 .01
-
China's Legal System of Trademarks
저스티스
1990 .08
-
상표법상 불사용취소심판에 있어서 웹사이트상 광고와 접속이 등록상표의 사용에 미치는 영향
외법논집
2008 .01
-
상표권에 관한 한미 FTA의 이해 및 분석
과학기술법연구
2007 .01
-
미국 상표법상 간접책임의 현황과 개선방안에 관한 연구
경영법률
2013 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-366-013558658