Abstract

To prevent domains from cyber-piracy, the WIPO offers private and confidential procedures tasked to address the legitimate use of a domain name. WIPO domain name arbitration consists of an alternative dispute resolution process in which one or more panelists make a binding decision over the legitimacy of a domain. This article investigates the structure of the discourse of this professional genre. Following Maley, this study focuses, first, on spotting the generic moves of WIPO domain name arbitration decisions. Second, the analysis unveils patterns shaping WIPO domain name arbitration decisions, hence exploring how discursive features work within this specialized discourse. Third, it examines whether corpus data reveal that this type of professional discourse has entered into a process of standardization. The study is based on Bhatia’s multi-perspective four-space model of discourse. This analytical framework emphasizes a multidisciplinary and multidimensional perspective which highlights that discourse is indistinguishable from constructing reality.