To achieve such a stake one needs to obtain a domain name from one of several domain name registries. Domain names in essence are obtained on a "first-come first-served" basis and the registry whom you register with, does not have a responsibility to determine whether you have any legitimate interest or that you are indeed the rightful owner of such a domain name. On this basis, a number of enterprising individuals as well as companies have attempted to reserve domain names that they think someone else will eventually want with a view of making a gain by re-selling the domain name back to those individuals with the view of making a profit out of the transaction. Although it is a gamble, nevertheless the gamble does pay off to some commonly known within the industry as "Cyber-squatters".

Foreseeing the increase in the number of disputes arising from cyber-squatting, the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) and the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre have jointly established the Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre (ADNDRC).

The ADNDRC is one of only four providers in the world and the first and only one located in Asia, offering dispute resolution services in regards to generic top level domain names (gTLD's), which are the top level domain names (e.g. .com; .net; .org) approved by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).

There are currently two offices of the ADNDRC (Beijing Office and Hong Kong Office) and it is anticipated other offices will be included in coming years as the ADNDRC expands into other regions. The ADNDRC (Hong Kong Office) is operated and managed by HKIAC whereas the ADNDRC (Beijing Office) is operated and managed by CIETAC.

Disputes handled by the ADNDRC offices are governed by the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) and the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy Rules (UDRP Rules) approved for implementation by ICANN on 26 August, 1999 and 24 October, 1999 as well as the ADNDRC Domain Name Dispute Supplemental Rules adopted by the ADNDRC with effect from 28 February 2002.

In essence the UDRP was developed to avoid the complications involved with jurisdictional issues that often arise within the confines of national courts.

There are many unique features of the ADNDRC Supplemental Rules that are different from the other three approved administrative-dispute-resolution service providers Supplemental Rules. One such feature is on the issue of fairness in appointing the administrative panel to hear the case. For example if a complainant elects a one person administrative panel and the respondent does not elect a three person administrative panel, the selected provider will appoint a sole panelist from it's list who is tasked with deciding the case and rendering a decision. Given that the complainant in the first place is the one who decides which provider to file the case, this has lead to some accusations within the Internet community that the complainants will chose a provider that has a tendency of favoring complainants. Whereas under the ADNDRC Supplemental Rules, both the complainant and the respondent will be given an identical list of five panelists from the ADNDRC list of panelists and will be asked to rank those given panelists in order of their preference. The sole administrative panelist to be appointed will be that administrative panelist who receives the highest mutual ranking from both parties. This process is similar in form to that previously adopted by the HKIAC whereby parties in traditional arbitrations are encouraged to use the "HKIAC List System" wherever possible in appointing their preferred arbitrator. Another feature of the ADNDRC system, which users have repeated mentioned is the simplicity of filing a claim and responding to a claim together with the ease of completing the necessary forms on-line thus allowing for better case management and the tracking of their respective cases. Nevertheless the ADNDRC does provide for alternative means of filing and responding to a claim if the parties so desire (for example facsimile and/or email). The secured web-based on-line domain name dispute resolution system developed by the ADNDRC with technology powered and supported by Tradelink Electronic Commerce Ltd has been carefully thought out with the user in mind.

For a complaint to succeed in a legitimate claim in retrieving a domain name from a registered holder, one needs to prove that the following three elements are present:

• the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a mark in which you have rights;
• the registrant has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name; and
• the respondent registered and is using the domain name in bad faith.

If successful in the claim, the registrar is required to transfer the domain name if the administrative panel so decides.

Some experts believe that the UDRP procedure is a highly effective model in which disputes are resolved relatively quickly and effectively at a modest cost, while others consider the procedure overly favourable to trademark holders. All in all the ADNDRC strives to achieve a balance with emphasis on standards and quality throughout the entire operation of the mandatory administrative UDRP proceedings.

As Dr. Milton Muller stated in his article "Success by Default: A New profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP" - " As long as domain names are visible to the public and semantically meaningful there will be a need for dispute resolution".

On this basis ADNDRC is now focusing its resources into the untapped market of internationalised domain names with the view of making ADNDRC the centre of excellence for the resolution of all forms of domain names both regionally and globally.