Delhi High Court Continues to Push for Action Against Non-Compliant Domain Name Registrars

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeiTY) has informed the Delhi High Court that failure of domain name registrars (DNR) to comply with judicial orders can be considered a breach of public order, leading to the blocking of their website or URL under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act. Section 69A empowers the Central Government to give directives for the blocking of any information via any computer resource. MeiTY made this submission in a status report submitted on March 25 regarding a set of pleas concerning the proliferation of fraudulent domain names. These pleas were filed by trademark and brand owners seeking relief against unauthorised persons who register these marks as part of their domain names. The Ministry has stated that although the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, provide a complaint redressal mechanism through intermediaries, they do not specify any penalties for infringement or violation of provisions or any other matters related to computer resources provided by the intermediary.

Also Read Cyber Law in Action: Cases and Trends

Justice Prathiba M Singh has taken note of the Ministry’s response, which states that they have followed up with ICANN, a private corporation responsible for managing IP addresses and domain name systems, regarding the issue of non-compliance of court orders by DNRs. ICANN’s policy allows for termination of a registrar’s accreditation agreement if they fail to comply with a court order. The status report reveals that India’s representative to the Government Advisory Committee of ICANN discussed the issue of domain name abuse and lack of verification processes in a recent meeting. The Ministry has stated that it will continue to address these issues in the future. The court has asked the lawyers to make submissions on May 26 on the manner in which final orders can be passed to ensure that orders of injunction against infringing domain names are implemented by DNRs and other authorities to prevent consumers from being misled.

The court has noted that the issues raised by MeitY in its status report, as well as the issues being considered by the court on behalf of several intellectual property owners and domain name registrars (DNRs), bring up various questions about how to enforce orders passed by Indian courts, particularly by DNRs who take the position that they are only bound by orders from competent courts within their own jurisdiction.

Also Read Cyber Law Demystified: A Guide for Businesses and Consumers

In February, the court directed MeiTY and the Department of Telecommunications to take action against DNRs that are not complying with the Information Technology Rules, 2021. The court emphasized the need for stringent measures to curb the proliferation of illegal domain name registrations that infringe upon the marks and names of well-known businesses. The court specifically called for action against DNRs that have not appointed grievance officers or have failed to implement orders from courts and authorities in India.

Previously, in September of last year, the court had asked various DNRs to provide details of their grievance officers and directed the DOT and MeITY to take action in accordance with the law if the DNRs had not appointed such officers.

Also Read Digital Frontier: Protecting Your Rights in the Online World?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *