Consultation Responses

1. The procedure, in common with UDRP, focuses on adoption of domain names. There are situations where a domain name itself is quite dissimilar from a registered Trade Mark, but the behaviour of the registrant (in the way his website is designed) causes consumer confusion which would be actionable by way of Trade Mark Infringement or passing-off actions. The most common way this will arise is by the adoption of meta-tags which are indentical or similar to the trade mark. Unfortunately the DRS cannot be used in such cases.
    
2. There is a fast track procedure under the criminal provisions in the Trade Marks Act 1994 whereby Trading standards officers can seize counterfeit goods. If such a seizure has been made from a registrant it would be desireable if nominet could immediately terminate that registrant's uk- based internet activities , perhaps via simple liason with the Trading Standards department.
    
3. There is no provision for co-complainants, except by way of the consolidation provision which only kicks in at a late stage. The situation of the co-plaintiffs in the One in a million case could act as a model here.