The trouble with the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP): Deconstructing common assumptions and developing a new approach to 'cybersquatting'

This thesis challenges the association between cybersquatting and trademark infringement. It shows that only a small number of domain name/trademark disputes constitute trademark infringement, passing off or dilution as prohibited in Canada and the Unites States. It argues that it is a mistake to use trademark law to justify the granting of relief against "cybersquatting", because it amounts to an unjustified expansion of trademark owner's rights over the general public's freedom to use trademarks for non-trademark purposes. It then argues that in order to reduce the number of bad decisions under the ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), it is necessary to identify what exactly is wrong with cybersquatting. After concluding that none of the rationales most often put forward are truly satisfactory, this thesis suggests that the civil law doctrine of abuse of rights is a better legal framework for dispute resolution mechanisms like the UDRP.