We are regularly contacted by students asking for information about the DRS to help with essays about Alternative Dispute Resolution or legal issues on the Internet.

While we are always happy to talk to you about this, we find that many people are asking similar questions so we hope that you find these frequently asked questions useful in the first instance.

What kind of dispute resolution service do you use? Is it the UDRP?
No, we have our own service called the Dispute Resolution Service (DRS). We have long provided mediation services to deal with disputes, but the new form of the service was developed in 2001. It was based on the UDRP, with a number of improvements which were based on the experience that others had had of the UDRP.

Can you give me an overview of the DRS?
Yes. There is a booklet too.

How does your DRS mediation work?
Like this. We do occasionally do email mediation, but that is at the discretion of our mediators. Both our in-house mediators are CEDR trained, and between them they handle about 10% of the UK's commercial mediation.

Do you have any statistics about the DRS?
Yes.

Have there been any cases about domain names in the UK?
Yes, several. On the whole, though, the presence of the DRS (for .uk) and the UDRP (for .com etc.) means that most disputes are dealt with this way, because these services tend to be faster and cheaper than the courts. The courts have look at the relationship between domain names and trade marks, questions of jurisdiction and other topics.

What are the differences between the UDRP and the DRS?
There are several, but main ones include:

• The rights they cover - the UDRP only deals with trade marks, but the DRS can deal with other rights.
• The tests that the complainant has to meet - in the DRS the test is for 'abusive registration' not 'bad faith', and in the DRS it is not necessary to show that the registrant does not have rights - although this can be relevant for abuse.
• The time of abuse - in the UDRP it is necessary to show that the registration was in 'bad faith', but in the DRS (while 'abusive' registration is enough) it is equally good to show 'abuse' during use.
• Mediation - the DRS has it, the UDRP does not.
• The experts - the DRS Experts are assigned cases strictly by rotation with each dispute only dealt with by one expert at first instance. In the UDRP there is an option to pay more to get 3 experts, one chosen by the UDRP provider on their own (sometimes secret) process, and the other two chosen by the parties.
• The appeal stage - the DRS has one, the UDRP does not.
• The ability to update them - we update the DRS from time to time. The UDRP has not been updated since it was created in 1999.
• Use - the UDRP is mandated by ICANN and is used for all generic Top Level Domains (e.g. .com, .net, .org, .info, .mobi), but the DRS (and variants of it) is used in .uk, .nz, .ch and others. Our statistics show that we are a much smaller service than the UDRP provided by WIPO (who is just one of the providers of the UDRP).

What is the difference between the .uk DRS and the .eu ADR?
The .eu ADR is also loosely based on the UDRP and so many of the differences between the DRS and the UDRP are also differences between the DRS and .eu ADR.

Other differences are:

• The .eu ADR is specified by European laws - the DRS is part of our contract
• The .eu ADR is also used as a way of complaining about the registry, to help solve jurisidctional problems.
• The .eu ADR is not provided by the registry itself, but by the Czech Arbitration Court. We provide the administration and mediation of the DRS, and the Experts are external.
• The way the .eu ADR is written suggests that it will be enough for the complainant to show (1) they have rights and EITHER (2) the registrant does not OR (3) the registration OR use is 'bad faith'. The text in the UDRP is (1) rights and BOTH (2) AND (3) 'bad faith' registration AND use. Replacing these 'ANDs' with 'ORs' makes the .eu ADR test much easier to pass (in theory). Time will tell whether this has an serious effect on those who register large domain portfolios. In the DRS, there is a requirement to show 'abuse' (either at registration or a later time).