has been followed in the main international instruments, including the WIPO conventions and the WTO’s agreement on trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPS). Possible gaps in dealing with copyright Mechanisms for ensuring the right balance between the protection of authors’ rights and protection of the public interest are needed. There may be too little coverage of non-IPR aspects in the protection of copyright (e.g. risk of infringement of other human rights while protecting copyright – e.g. privacy and freedom of expression). 5.4 Trademark The main relevance of trademark on the Internet is the question of registration of domain names. In the early phase of Internet development, the registration of domain names was done on a first come, first served basis. This led to cybersquatting, the practice of registering names of companies and selling them later at a higher price. Trademark holders reacted by introducing stricter protection of trademark in the ICANN governance regime. The recent introduction of the new gTLDs reinvigorated the relevance of trademark for domain names, ICANN, and overall IG. Status of governance mechanisms for trademark WIPO’s Madrid and Paris conventions provide the basis for trademark protection on the Internet. Another WIPO instrument, the Nairobi Treaty on the Protection of the Olympic Symbol, was in focus during the debate on the special protection of the Olympic name in the registration of new gTLDs. The trademark Clearing House under ICANN's new gTLD program authenticates information from rights holders and provides this information to registries and registrars. The Uniform Dispute Resolution Procedures (UDRP) is the primary dispute resolution procedure. The UDRP is stipulated in advance as a dispute resolution mechanism in all contracts involving the registration of gTLDs (e.g. .com, .edu, .org, .net) and for some ccTLDs as well. Its unique aspect is that arbitration awards are applied directly through changes in the DNS without resorting to enforcement of trademark protection through national courts. Possible gaps in dealing with trademark One submission to the WGEC/correspondence group indicated a potential policy gap in dealing with competing claims for protection of trademarks and other internationally important names (e.g. cases of ‘.amazon’ as new gTLD). 31