ABSTRACT
One crucial issue that we have to explore is whether the UDRP’s favouritism towards the trademark community is consequential to the lack of a precise legal definition concerning domain names (intellectual problem) or is associated with the absence of ethical standards. Making this distinction is important, considering that – in the first instance – favouritism is incidental and peripheral to rules,which, although initially represent a fair consensus between ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’, it is to be expected that at some point they will result in favouring the wealthy and professional players (‘haves’).1 In this instance, favouritism relates to an attempt to structure a system that intentionally seeks to promote the interests of ‘haves’. Rule makers and their institutions can only attend to some possible reconfigurations, readjusting those rules, which have been skewed towards particular groups. In all other cases, the readjustment should come from the application of ethics.
