@ARTICLE{26583261_141124545_2014, 
	author = {Liudmila Terentieva}, 
	keywords = {, domain names, arbitration centres, arbitration agreement, international commercial arbitration, mediation court, registration agreementUDPR procedure},
	title = {Resolution of Domain Disputes under UDPR},
	journal = {},
	year = {2014},
	number = {4},
	pages = {124-135},
	url = {https://law-journal.hse.ru/en/2014--4/141124545.html},
	publisher = {},
	abstract = {The paper examines the legal nature of specialized non-state arbitration centres which deal with aspecial type of disputes related to domain names under the UDRP procedure (Uniform Domain NameDispute Resolution Policy). The UDPR is a unified strategy of resolving domain disputes which wasdeveloped by ICANN — an organization distributing names and numbers. The article compares andcontrasts specialized non-state arbitration centres under the UDPR and commercial arbitration. Theauthor stresses that the common feature in the functions of specialized centres and the internationalсommercial arbitration is non-state functioning, private law disputes, applying non-state sources of law(lex mercatoria and lex informatica) and making agreements providing for the jurisdiction of organizations.However, these characteristics of functioning of specialized arbitration centres and the possibilityto transfer the disputes to a national court and non-compensatory protective means allow classifyingsuch centres not to mediatory but commercial arbitrations but to extrajudicial alternative types of disputeresolution. The article presents a comparative analysis of the legal nature of agreement under whichdisputes are transferred to specialized arbitration centres and arbitration agreement the legal nature ofwhich is detailed within contractual, procedural and mixed theories. The article stresses that the clausein an agreement on registering a domain name under which the owner (administrator) of the domainname agrees to consider a dispute under UDPR rules is not completely consistent with the nature ofarbitration agreement as it does not exclude the jurisdiction of state court for such disputes which maybe within the competence of arbitration court. This condition contradicts the nature of arbitration trialcharacterized with final opinion and independence of courts which are part of the state judicial system.},
	annote = {The paper examines the legal nature of specialized non-state arbitration centres which deal with aspecial type of disputes related to domain names under the UDRP procedure (Uniform Domain NameDispute Resolution Policy). The UDPR is a unified strategy of resolving domain disputes which wasdeveloped by ICANN — an organization distributing names and numbers. The article compares andcontrasts specialized non-state arbitration centres under the UDPR and commercial arbitration. Theauthor stresses that the common feature in the functions of specialized centres and the internationalсommercial arbitration is non-state functioning, private law disputes, applying non-state sources of law(lex mercatoria and lex informatica) and making agreements providing for the jurisdiction of organizations.However, these characteristics of functioning of specialized arbitration centres and the possibilityto transfer the disputes to a national court and non-compensatory protective means allow classifyingsuch centres not to mediatory but commercial arbitrations but to extrajudicial alternative types of disputeresolution. The article presents a comparative analysis of the legal nature of agreement under whichdisputes are transferred to specialized arbitration centres and arbitration agreement the legal nature ofwhich is detailed within contractual, procedural and mixed theories. The article stresses that the clausein an agreement on registering a domain name under which the owner (administrator) of the domainname agrees to consider a dispute under UDPR rules is not completely consistent with the nature ofarbitration agreement as it does not exclude the jurisdiction of state court for such disputes which maybe within the competence of arbitration court. This condition contradicts the nature of arbitration trialcharacterized with final opinion and independence of courts which are part of the state judicial system.}
}