Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An established authority in the field, this work provides comprehensive analysis of the law and practice relating to internet domain names at an international level, combined with a detailed survey of the 36 most important domain name jurisdictions worldwide, including the US, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands, Japan, China, Singapore, Russia, Canada, and Australia, and new chapters on Israel, Mexico, South Korea, Brazil, Colombia, Portugal, and South Africa. The survey includes extensive country-by-country analysis of how domain names relate to existing trade mark law, and upon the developing case law in the field, as well as the alternative dispute resolution procedures. In its second edition, this work analyses, in depth, key developments in the field including ICANN's new gTLD program. The program, introducing more than 700 new top-level domains, will have far-reaching consequences for brand name industries worldwide and for usage of the internet. The complicated application process is considered in detail as well as filing and review procedures, the delegation process, the role and function of the Trademark Clearing House and the Sunrise and Trademark Claims Services, dispute resolution, and new rights protection mechanisms. Other developments covered include new registration processes such as the use of privacy and proxy services, as well as the expansion of the scope of internationalized domain names, including the addition of a number of generic top-level domains such as “.tel” and “.travel”. Also considered are developments relating to the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) in terms of the nature of cases seen under the Policy and the number of cases filed, as well as the recent paperless e-UDRP initiative. The Uniform Rapid Suspension System, working alongside the UDRP in the new gTLD space, is also discussed in a new chapter on this process. Giving detailed information about the registration of domain names at national, regional and international levels, analysis of the dispute resolution processes at each of those levels, and strategic guidance on how to manage domain names as part of an overall brand strategy, this leading work in international domain name law is essential reading for practitioners in the field.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.069 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".