Tekijänoikeuden erikoiskirjasto

 
How to efficiently protect a domain name?
Muistilista on tyhjä
Vis
Hylly
  • GACZKOWSKA SA-CO30
Henkilönnimi
  • Gaczkowska, Monika.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö
  • How to efficiently protect a domain name?
Julkaistu
  • 2016.
Ulkoasutiedot
  • 95-111.
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa
  • Comparative law review, ISSN 0866-9449 22
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms.
  • Cybercrime rates are increasing in Poland and throughout the world. There are many types of offences concerning internet domains, among others, cybersquatting, typosquatting, cyber smearing, and cyberwildcatting. The following article is a comparative study of the settlement of disputes concerning internet domain names taking as an example the Domain Name Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Information Technology and Telecommunications (PIIT) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Arbitration and Mediation Center. Between the two processes of recovery of the domains there are many similarities. During the study legislation was sought in the Polish legal system, which is related to internet domains. In Poland, there is no particular legal regulation regarding internet domain names. One may search for protective measures in the Act on Combating Unfair Competition [o zwalczaniu nieuczciwej konkurencji], Industrial Property Law [Prawo wlasnosci przemyslowej], and the Civil Code [Kodeks cywilny]. This article commends the settlement of disputes through arbitration and describes them in detail.
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Elektronisen aineiston sijainti ja käyttö (URI)
  • http://apcz.umk.pl/czasopisma/index.php/CLR/article/view/CLR.2016.010/12140 Linkki verkkoaineistoon 
*00002171nab a22003614a 4500
*00112424
*00520201106111836.0
*008180425s2016\\\\xx\|||||\||||\|||||0eng|c
*035  $a25146
*035  $a(PLib-conv)0000025146
*0410 $aeng
*090  $aOMA:SA-CO30
*1001 $aGaczkowska, Monika.
*24510$aHow to efficiently protect a domain name? /$cMonika Gaczkowska.
*260  $c2016.
*300  $a95-111.
*4901 $aComparative law review,$v22$x0866-9449
*520  $aCybercrime rates are increasing in Poland and throughout the world. There are many types of offences concerning internet domains, among others, cybersquatting, typosquatting, cyber smearing, and cyberwildcatting.  The following article is a comparative study of the settlement of disputes concerning internet domain names taking as an example the Domain Name Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Information Technology and Telecommunications (PIIT) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Arbitration and Mediation Center. Between the two processes of recovery of the domains there are many similarities. During the study legislation was sought in the Polish legal system, which is related to internet domains. In Poland, there is no particular legal regulation regarding internet domain names. One may search for protective measures in the Act on Combating Unfair Competition [o zwalczaniu nieuczciwej konkurencji], Industrial Property Law [Prawo wlasnosci przemyslowej], and the Civil Code [Kodeks cywilny]. This article commends the settlement of disputes through arbitration and describes them in detail.
*599  $bpdf informaatikolla.
*653  $aDOMAIN-NIMET
*653  $aVERKKORIKOLLISUUS
*653  $aPUOLA
*653  $aCYBERSQUATTING
*653  $aTYPOSQUATTING
*653  $aCYBER SMEARING
*653  $aCYBERWILDCATTING
*653  $aDISPUTES
*653  $aINTERNET DOMAINS
*8102 $aComparative law review,$x0866-9449
*852  $hSA-CO30$cGACZKOWSKA
*85640$uhttp://apcz.umk.pl/czasopisma/index.php/CLR/article/view/CLR.2016.010/12140$yLinkki verkkoaineistoon
*979  $a0000025146
*999  $aMikroMarc$b[Article]$x7
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.
Vis
Lähetä