• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.519-546
• /
• 2004

On June 27, 2002 Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) launched dot-ca domain name dispute resolution service through BCICAC and Resolution Canada, Inc. The Domain name Dispute Resolution Policy (CDRP) of CIRA is basically modelled after Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy(UDRP), while the substance of CDRP is slightly modified to meet the need of Canadian domain name regime and its legal system. Firstly, this article examined CIRA's domain name dispute resolution policy in general. It is obvious that the domain name dispute resolution proceeding is non-binding arbitration to which arbitration law does not apply. However it still belongs to the arbitration and far from the usual mediation process. Domain name arbitrators render decision rather than assist disputing parties themselves reach to agreement. In this respect the domain name arbitration is similar to arbitration or litigation rather than mediation. Secondly it explored how the panels applied the substantive standards in domain name arbitration. There is some criticism that panelists interprets the test of "confusingly similar" in conflicting manner. As a result critics assert that courts' judicial review is necessary to reduce the conflicting interpretation on the test of substantive standards stipulated in paragraph 3 of CDRP. Finally, it analysed the court's position on domain name arbitral award. Canadian courts do not seem to establish a explicit standard for judicial review over it yet. However, in Black v. Molson case Ontario Superior Court applied the UDRP rules in examining the WIPO panel's decision, while US courts often apply domestic patent law and ACPA(Anticyber -squatting Consumer's Protection Act) to review domain name arbitration decision rather than UDRP rules. In conclusion this article suggests that courts should restrict their judicial review on domain name administrative panel's decision at best. This will lead to facilitating the use of ADR in domain name dispute resolution and reducing the burden of courts' dockets.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제15권
• /
• pp.169-209
• /
• 2001

As a domain name can be registered simply by filing an application for registration, disputes over the domain name between the holder of domain name and the holder of trademark increased. Since the holder of trademark who was late for registering domain name is willing to pay for the return of domain name, cybersquatters increased. Cybersqatters are not genuine users of the Internet. This article is to compare the construction of law by American Courts and by Korean Courts and to assert the creation of the law similar to the law of US as to anti-cybersqatting. American Courts applied the Trademark Act and the Anti-Dilution Act to resolve the disputes over domain name. To apply the Trademark Act, the Court required the plaintiffs to prove that the goods or the services expressed by the domain name should be identical or similar to the goods or the services represented by the trademark. However, there were many cases where the holder of domain name used it for the goods or the services irrelevant to those of the holder of trademark. Also, the Anti-Dilution Act could not successfully protect the holder of trademark from cybersquatters because it required that the trademark should be famous or distinctive. As a result, the US promulgated a new law which is designed to prohibit cybersquatters from being free of sanction by the existing laws. Korea Courts applied the Trademark Act and the Unfair Competition Prohibition Act to the cases disputing domain name. Likewise in the US, Korean Courts must cope with the issue of identity of the goods or the services, and the famousness or distinctiveness of trademark. The Courts hesitate to give a winning judgement to the holder of trademark simply because the domain name of alleged violator confused the trademark. Some scholars advocate the broadening of construction of the Unfair Competition Prohibition Act to illegalize cybersquatting but it is beyond the meaning of the law. Accordingly, it is a time to make a law similar to the Anti-Cybersquatting Act of the US. The law must be a fair and reasonable compromise to resolve the collision between system of registration of domain name and the system of registration of trademark. Some commentators advocate that the registration of domain name should be examined just as the one of trademark and to facilitate it, the Patent and Trademark Office should have jurisdiction of registration of domain name. But it abandons the distinction of domain name and trademark and results in obstructing e-commerce. By adopting the Anti-Cybersqatting Act, we can prohibit it. In other cases, we get a reasonable adjustment between the holder of domain name and the holder of trademark through the Trademark Act and the Unfair Competition Prohibition Act.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.167-187
• /
• 2007

As Korea has reached a free trade agreement with the United States of America, it is required to provide an appropriate procedure to ".kr" domain name disputes based on the principles established in the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy(UDRP). Currently, Internet address Dispute Resolution Committee(IDRC) established under Article 16 of the Act on Internet Address Resources provides the dispute resolution proceedings to resolve ".kr" domain name disputes. While the IDRC's proceeding is similar to the UDRP administrative proceeding in procedural aspects, the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy that is established by the IDRC and that applies to disputes involving ".kr" domain names is very different from the UDRP for generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) in substantial aspects. Under the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement(KORUS FTA), it is expected that either the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy to be amended to adopt the UDRP or the IDRC to examine the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy in order to harmonize it with the principles established in the UDRP. It is a common practice of cybersquatters to warehouse a number of domain names without any active use of these domain names after their registration. The Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy provides that the complainant may request to transfer or delete the registration of the disputed domain name if the registrant registered, holds or uses the disputed domain name in bad faith. This provision lifts the complainant's burden of proof to show the respondent's bad faith because the complainant is only required to prove one of the three bad faiths which are registration in bad faith, holding in bad faith, or use in bad faith. The aforementioned resolution procedure is different from the UDRP regime which requires the complainant, in compliance with paragraph 4(b) of the UDRP, to prove that the disputed domain name has been registered in bad faith and is being used in bad faith. Therefore, the complainant carries heavy burden of proof under the UDRP. The IDRC should deny the complaint if the respondent has legitimate rights or interests in the domain names. Under the UDRP, the complainant must show that the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The UDRP sets out three illustrative circumstances, any one of which if proved by the respondent, shall be evidence of the respondent's rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name. As the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy provides only a general provision regarding the respondent's legitimate rights or interests, the respondent can be placed in a very week foundation to be protected under the Policy. It is therefore recommended for the IDRC to adopt the three UDRP circumstances to guide how the respondent can demonstrate his/her legitimate rights or interests in the disputed domain name. In accordance with the KORUS FTA, the Korean Government is required to provide online publication to a reliable and accurate database of contact information concerning domain name registrants. Cybersquatters often provide inaccurate contact information or willfully conceal their identity to avoid objection by trademark owners. It may cause unnecessary and unwarranted delay of the administrative proceedings. The respondent may loss the opportunity to assert his/her rights or legitimate interests in the domain name due to inability to submit the response effectively and timely. The respondent could breach a registration agreement with a registrar which requires the registrant to submit and update accurate contact information. The respondent who is reluctant to disclose his/her contact information on the Internet citing for privacy rights and protection. This is however debatable as the respondent may use the proxy registration service provided by the registrar to protect the respondent's privacy.

• 한국IT서비스학회지
• /
• 제13권3호
• /
• pp.129-148
• /
• 2014

Generally, the Internet Address Resources Act is intended to protect the public from acts of Internet "cybersquatting", a term used to describe the bad faith, abusive registration of Internet domain names. In determining whether a person has a bad faith intent, a court may consider factors such as, (1) the trademark or other intellectual property rights of the person, if any, in the domain name, (2) the extent to which the domain name consists of the legal name of the person or a name that is otherwise commonly used to identify that person, (3) the person's prior use, if any, of the domain name in connection with the bona fide offering of any goods or services, (4) the person's bona fide noncommercial or fair use of the mark in a site accessible under the domain name, (5) the person's intent to divert consumers from the mark owner's online location to a site accessible under the domain name that could harm the goodwill represented by the mark, either for commercial gain or with the intent to tarnish or disparage the mark, by creating a likelihood of confusion as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the site, (6) the person's offer to transfer, sell, or otherwise assign the domain name to the mark owner or any third party for financial gain without having used, or having an intent to use, the domain name in the bona fide offering of any goods or services, or the person's prior conduct indicating a pattern of such conduct.

• 한국정보통신학회논문지
• /
• 제15권1호
• /
• pp.41-50
• /
• 2011

DNS(Domain Name System)는 인터넷상의 호스트의 도메인주소를 IP주소로 변환하거나 IP주소를 도메인주소로 변환하는 이름해결 메카니즘을 총칭한다. 본 논문에서는 1차 DNS 서버가 오류로 인해 정지하더라도 2차 DNS 서버가 대신하여 서비스를 지속할 수 있도록 하는 결함내성을 갖는 DNS 시스템 구축에 관해 연구하였다.

• 대한전자공학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 대한전자공학회 1998년도 하계종합학술대회논문집
• /
• pp.301-304
• /
• 1998

Now, the world is faced with radical changing in the new rvolution which is followed by speading and utilization of internet. The domain names which are currently used on the internet are unique throgh out the world. Therefore, U.S government positively intervenes in the management of the internet domain name for the effective implementation. The thesis descrbes research of the korean domain name system which allows us to use korea character into current internet domain name system and implements the architecture of the korean domain name system by analysis the structure and behavior of domain name server.

• 한국정보처리학회논문지
• /
• 제5권7호
• /
• pp.1855-1862
• /
• 1998

인터넷 사용자는 호스트 접속을 위하여 DNS로부터 IP주소를 획득한다. 그러나 국내의 사용자는 익숙하지 않은 영문어순의 도메인을 사용하여야 한다. 기존 시스템의 어순은 한국어와는 반대이므로 인터넷 보편화에 장애가 되고 있다. 따라서 국내 사용자에게 적합한 한글 도메인 네임 시스템의 필요성이 높아지고 있다. 본 논문의 한글 도메인 시스템에서는 기존의 도메인 네임 시스템과 함께 운영하기 위하여, 영문으로의 변환 규칙과 한글 도메인 네임의 작성 규칙을 세웠다. 또 한글어순의 처리를 위하여 STROP을 설계하였다. STROP은 SLDF가 국문 SLD을 영문 SLD로 변환하며, 이를 NFDNG가 영문 어순으로 만들게 된다. 본 논문에서 제안한 한글 도메인 네임 시스템을 사용한다면 도메인 명의 함축된 의미를 사용자가 쉽게 파악할 수 있게 되고, 영문 전자로 인하여 발생하는 도메인 등록의 불만을 해소할 수 있으리라 기대된다. 그 결과 인터넷 보편화에 기여할 수 있을 것이다.

• 전자공학회논문지 IE
• /
• 제44권1호
• /
• pp.20-26
• /
• 2007

지금까지의 이동 네트워크 환경에서의 연구는 주로 경로 설정 방법에 대해 이루어겼으나, 실제 사용자에게 서비스를 제공하기 위해서는 DNS(Domain Name System)가 우선적으로 지원되어야 한다 이동 애드혹 네트워크의 고유한 특성으로 인하여 유선 네트워크에서 사용되고 있는 DNS를 그대로 도입하는 것은 문제가 발생한다. 분산 방식 DNS를 사용하는 경우에는 노드의 이동에 대해 효율적으로 대처할 수 있다는 장점을 가지나, 도메인 네임 충돌 문제를 해결하기 위한 오버헤드가 발생하게 되며, 중앙 방식 DNS를 사용하는 경우에는 네임 정보 획득을 위한 통신이 유니캐스트 기반으로 동작하고 네임의 할당 및 관리에 따른 오버헤드 문제를 해결할 수는 있으나 DNS서버의 이동에 따른 DNS네임 서비스의 연속성 있는 지원 문제가 해결되어야 한다. 따라서 본 논문에서는 이동 애드혹 네트워크 환경에서 중앙 방식 DNS를 기반으로 연속성 있는 서비스를 지원하면서도 네임 할당 및 관리에 있어서 효율적으로 동작하는 Manet DNS를 제안하며 서버의 이동성으로 인해 발생할 수 있는 네트워크 병합 및 분할 문제에 대한 해결책을 제시한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제13권
• /
• pp.1013-1032
• /
• 2000

At present, the scale of Electronic Commerce through internet has been rapidly increasing due to the development of information & communication technology, and aggregated to 2.4 billion dollar in America last year (1998). The market scale of worldwide electronic commerce is also presumed to be about 130 billion dollar in 2000, and to occupy more than 20% of the whole world trade in world 2020. Since the right of trademark, despite of being effective only in registered nations on the principle of territorialism, is unified on the cyber space of internet without domestic barrier or local limitation which make it easier to conduct the distribution of information rapidly through the address-internet domain name, those are very important that the systematic dispute-solving plan on problems such as decision of its Act and international jurisdiction to be established, in an effort to prevent the newly emerging dispute instances such as trademark infringement and improper competitiveness. In addition, it is natural that on the threshold of the electronic commerce age which formed with an unified area without the worldwide specific regulation, each country including us makes haste with the enactment of "electronic commerce Act" aiming at coming into force in 1999, in keeping with getting through "non-tariff law on electronic commerce" by U. S. parliament on May, 1998. In view of the properties of electronic commerce transactions through internet, there are the large curtailment of distributive channel, surmounting of restrictions on transaction area, space and time and the easy feedback with consumer and the cheap-required capital, from which the problems may arise - registration of trademark, the trademark infringement of domain name and the protection of prestigious trademark. Therefore, it is necessary to take the counter-measure, with a view of reviewing the infringement of trademark and domain name and the instances of each national precedent and to preventing the disputes. The improvement of the persistent system should be needed to propel the harmonious protection of those holding trademark right's credit and demanders' expectant profit by way of the righteous use of trademark.

• 한국산학기술학회논문지
• /
• 제20권5호
• /
• pp.36-46
• /
• 2019

인터넷에 연결된 호스트의 개수가 대폭 증가해 1984년 도메인 네임 시스템(Domain Name System, 이하 DNS)이 도입되었다. DNS는 웹 사이트를 검색할 때, 일련의 숫자로 이루어진 복잡한 IP 주소를 외우지 않고 편리성이 높은 문자 형태의 주소를 사용할 수 있게 함으로써 현재 인터넷을 이용하는 모든 사용자에게 중요한 핵심 요소로 사용되고 있다. 그러나 이러한 DNS의 중요성에 비해 권한 할당 문제, 공인 등록 관련 분쟁, DNS 캐시 포이즈닝(DNS Cache Poisoning), DNS 스푸핑(DNS Spoofing), 중간자 공격(Man-in-the-Middle Attack), DNS 증폭 공격(DNS Amplification Attack)과 같은 각종 보안 취약점, 초연결 네트워크 시대의 더 많은 도메인 네임의 필요성 등 많은 문제점이 존재한다. 본 연구에서는 기존의 DNS가 가지는 이러한 문제점을 효과적으로 개선하고자 분산원장기술인 블록체인을 이용해 DNS를 구현하는 법을 제안하고, 이더리움 기반의 플랫폼을 이용해 구현하였다. 추가적으로 기존의 도메인 네임 등록 및 도메인 네임 서버의 정성적 성능 비교 평가를 하고, 제안하는 시스템이 기존 DNS의 보안 문제점을 개선할 수 있는지 보안 평가를 하였다. 결론적으로 블록체인을 이용해 더 안전하고 효율적으로 DNS 서비스를 제공할 수 있다는 것을 보였다.