Probably more details than you wanted, but…
If one wanted to pursue this through the courts, even if the name was owned by someone in another country one could go through U.S. courts under the idea that the name registry is run out of the U.S. in Virginia and so they had jurisdiction. Of course if the registrar the name was bought through wasn’t in the U.S. they probably wouldn’t do whatever the U.S. court told them to do just on general principal.
ICANN (the body that runs the domain name system) before the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act of 1999 already knew the the courts were a really complicated way of trying to get anything done, so it set up a universal dispute resolution process (UDRP) that anyone who has one of the top level domains (in this case, .com) had to agree to use if a dispute should arise. The main problem here is that it’s a minimum of something like $1,500 to bring up a UDRP case to try to take a name away from someone else, and then you probably have to pay a lawyer to write up your complaint, and the money isn’t refunded if you lose. I guess the idea is that UDRP is usually cheaper and faster than a long, drawn out court battle and kind of has precedence over the whole world… except that if the loser of UDRP decision wants to he or she can take the case to court after that and sometimes get the decision overruled. In some cases this has been a good thing, like when the UDRP panelist(s) come to a decision not supported by the policy they are supposed to be following. In other cases it’s just more hassle.
The nicest thing about going the U.S. court system (with the US ACPA of 1999) is that the loser can be fined big bucks. Through UDRP the most that can happen is the name gets dropped or taken away and you are put on record as losing so probably look more guilty to start with if another case comes. A number of immoral people play the system, knowing that.