The Internet Domain Registry (Prescribed Practices and Prescribed Requirements) Regulations 2024
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
3 Prescribed requirements for arrangements for dealing with complaints
(1) The requirements in paragraph (4) are prescribed for the purposes of section 124O(3)(b) of the Communications Act 2003 (prescribed requirements) in relation to arrangements made by a qualifying internet domain registry for dealing with complaints that fall within paragraph (2). (2) A complaint falls within this paragraph if it is a complaint about cybersquatting and concerns— (a) a trade mark that the complainant owns or has permission from the owner to use, which is registered or recognised anywhere in the world, and (b) an internet domain name registered with the registry under whose arrangements the complainant is making their complaint. (3) In this regulation— “bad faith”, in relation to cybersquatting, includes registering an internet domain name primarily for the purpose of— selling, renting out or otherwise transferring the internet domain name, at a profit, to a person who owns, or has permission from the owner to use, the trade mark, or to the competitor of such a person; preventing a person who owns, or has permission from the owner to use, the trade mark from reflecting the trade mark in an internet domain name, where this is part of a pattern of such conduct; disrupting the business of a competitor; attracting, for commercial gain, users of the internet to a website or other online location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the trade mark; “cybersquatting” means the registration of an internet domain name that is identical or similar to a trade mark by a person who— does not own, or have a legitimate interest in, that trade mark, and registers that internet domain name in bad faith. (4) The requirements referred to in paragraph (1) are that the arrangements must— (a) if there is a charge for dealing with a complaint, only make provision for a charge that is proportionate to the cost of providing those arrangements, whether to the registry or any third party used by the registry to provide any part of those arrangements; (b) provide for a decision on a complaint— (i) to be taken within a reasonable period of the receipt of the complaint by the registry; (ii) for the complainant to be notified of the decision within a reasonable period of the decision having been taken; (iii) where the decision is made in the complainant’s favour, provide for appropriate action to be taken by the registry within a reasonable period of the decision having been made and for the notification to be provided under paragraph (ii) to set out what action will be taken by the registry and within what time period; (c) be publicly available and in language that is easily understood by an ordinary reader; (d) not prevent any person from bringing proceedings in a court or tribunal; (e) take into account the need to be— (i) equitable to both parties to the complaint, and (ii) proportionate.
3 Prescribed requirements for arrangements for dealing with complaints
(1) The requirements in paragraph (4) are prescribed for the purposes of section 124O(3)(b) of the Communications Act 2003 (prescribed requirements) in relation to arrangements made by a qualifying internet domain registry for dealing with complaints that fall within paragraph (2). (2) A complaint falls within this paragraph if it is a complaint about cybersquatting and concerns— (a) a trade mark that the complainant owns or has permission from the owner to use, which is registered or recognised anywhere in the world, and (b) an internet domain name registered with the registry under whose arrangements the complainant is making their complaint. (3) In this regulation— “bad faith”, in relation to cybersquatting, includes registering an internet domain name primarily for the purpose of— selling, renting out or otherwise transferring the internet domain name, at a profit, to a person who owns, or has permission from the owner to use, the trade mark, or to the competitor of such a person; preventing a person who owns, or has permission from the owner to use, the trade mark from reflecting the trade mark in an internet domain name, where this is part of a pattern of such conduct; disrupting the business of a competitor; attracting, for commercial gain, users of the internet to a website or other online location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the trade mark; “cybersquatting” means the registration of an internet domain name that is identical or similar to a trade mark by a person who— does not own, or have a legitimate interest in, that trade mark, and registers that internet domain name in bad faith. (4) The requirements referred to in paragraph (1) are that the arrangements must— (a) if there is a charge for dealing with a complaint, only make provision for a charge that is proportionate to the cost of providing those arrangements, whether to the registry or any third party used by the registry to provide any part of those arrangements; (b) provide for a decision on a complaint— (i) to be taken within a reasonable period of the receipt of the complaint by the registry; (ii) for the complainant to be notified of the decision within a reasonable period of the decision having been taken; (iii) where the decision is made in the complainant’s favour, provide for appropriate action to be taken by the registry within a reasonable period of the decision having been made and for the notification to be provided under paragraph (ii) to set out what action will be taken by the registry and within what time period; (c) be publicly available and in language that is easily understood by an ordinary reader; (d) not prevent any person from bringing proceedings in a court or tribunal; (e) take into account the need to be— (i) equitable to both parties to the complaint, and (ii) proportionate.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
How this law is officially changed
Solon does not know this law's official route yet. The proposal is recorded all the same, and the route appears here once its source is added.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.