DNRs may lose their "safe harbour" protection if actively promoting infringing alternative domain names 

A domain name serves as the unique address of a business or individual on the internet, functioning as its "Online Soul"and identifying its brand, house name, or trademark. In an Injunction application in this case, the Delhi High Court addressed a systematic form of cyber fraud where unknown third parties register domain names using well-known trademarks to host fake websites that deceive the public into making payments for fraudulent jobs, dealerships, or franchises.

Challenges of Domain Name Registration

The domain name system operates through a hierarchy involving ICANN (the overall regulator), Registry Operators(which manage master directories for extensions like .com or .net), and Domain Name Registrars (DNRs) (entities that enable domain registration for users). The current system has proven unsatisfactory because:

• Redacted WHOIS Data: DNRs often use "privacy by default" to mask the identity of registrants, allowing scammers to operate in anonymity.
• Fictitious Information: Even when unmasked, registrants frequently provide fake addresses and temporary mobile numbers or email IDs that are untraceable.
• Profit Motive: DNRs often generate significant revenue by suggesting alternative domain names containing trademarks to prospective registrants or selling "premium" domain names at exorbitant prices.

Privacy vs. Legitimate Interest

DNRs frequently cite the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) and India’s DPDP Act (Digital Personal Data Protection Act) to justify redacting registrant data. However, the Court ruled that intellectual property protection and the prevention of fraud constitute a "legitimate interest"that permits the disclosure of personal data to a third party. Under the new Registration Data Policy, DNRs must provide access to non-public registration data when a court order is issued or a legitimate interest is established.

Intermediary Obligations and "Safe Harbour"

While DNRs are classified as intermediaries, they are required to exercise due diligence under the Information Technology Act and its 2021 Rules. The Court determined that DNRs may lose their "safe harbour" protection if they:

1. Actively promote infringing alternative domain names through automated algorithms for profit.
2. Fail to implement technical measures to prevent the registration of domain names involving well-known marks.
3. Refuse to comply with court orders, which can lead to their services being blocked in India under Section 69A of the IT Act for affecting public order.

Financial Safeguards and Bank Roles

To curb financial frauds, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), under court direction, introduced the "Beneficiary Bank Account Name Look-up Facility" for RTGS and NEFT systems. This facility allows remitters to verify the name of a bank account holder before initiating a transfer, preventing credits to fake accounts posing as legitimate businesses. Furthermore, banks are now governed by a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) that mandates cooperation with Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) in investigating cybercrime.

Court Directions and the "Dynamic +" Injunction

The Court issued several comprehensive directions to protect brand owners and the public:

• "Dynamic +" Injunctions: These injunctions extend protection to future infringing domain names or mirror websites as soon as they are created, without requiring a new lawsuit each time.
• Elimination of Default Privacy: DNRs are prohibited from masking registrant details on a default basis; privacy must be an "opt-in" paid service.
• Mandatory Disclosure: DNRs must disclose all registrant contact and payment details to individual parties with a legitimate interest or LEAs within 72 hours.
• Permanent Blocking: Injunctioned domain names must remain permanently blocked and cannot be returned to a common pool for re-registration.
• Grievance Officers: All DNRs operating in India must appoint Grievance Officers located in India to facilitate the implementation of court orders.