The issue of determining the rights on Domain Names is
getting more and more intriguing day by day.
In a recent ex-parte interim order of the Delhi High Court, an individual Vijay Kumar Bharti has been
prevented from using a domain name registered by him as www.bharti.com and the
rights to use www.bharti.com and www.bharti.net has been transferred to the Company Bharti
Televentures Ltd.. The exparte interim order was passed on the basis of an
application made by the Company.
It has been reported that the Court has however held that
Mr Vijay Kumar Bharti is free to use his full name as a domain name.
It is not clear whether it was established that Mr Bharti
had tried to pass off his site as belonging to the group or tried to take
advantage of the similarity in name in any manner detrimental to the interests
of the Company. The main consideration appears to be the similarity of the
domain name to the name of the Company and the Company's desire to use the
domain name space even though it had not been alert enough to register the
name itself earlier.
It is also not clear if the Court had been satisfactorily
clarified why the Company could not use any alternative domain names including
www.bharti.co.in as its business website or www.bhartiteleventures.com or
www.bhartiteleventuresltd.com which would have provided enough scope for
the company to carry on its business without unfairly restricting an
individual from registering his personal name as a domain name and his
fundamental right to carry on business.
The interim order has once again highlighted the growing
influence of Trade Mark owners of the Meta Society with money power over
individuals who lack financial muscle to fight a legal battle.
The order gives a new meaning to the rights of individuals
and makes them subordinate to the rights of a Company. It is not clear why an
individual should be compelled to use his full name as the domain name and not
the Company.
Just as in the case of Maruti Udyog's claim on the word
Maruti, Bharti Televentures claim on the word "Bharti" impinges on the rights
of many ventures and trade marks already using either "Bharti" or "Bharati".
It is not clear how one entrepreneur can be provided an exclusive right over
the name "Bharti" excluding several others including persons with the name
Bharti who have also been first to register the name on the domain space.
Does this mean that "First to Market Space" principle is no
longer valid?
It is to address this kind of cases that Naavi has proposed
a web based service Verify For Lookalikes details of which are available at
www.verify4lookalikes.com.
Why can't Mr Bharti and the Company Bharti be compelled to use a service of
this type and live peacefully rather than fight over non existent rights?
In the interest of protecting the fundamental rights of
individuals in India and elsewhere there appears to be a need to seek appeal
against this decision of the Honourable High Court and I urge public spirited
Cyber Savvy lawyers to take up this cause.
Naavi
February 13, 2002
Related Article in Economic Times
For
Structured Online Courses in Cyber laws, Visit Cyber Law College.com