UDRP review

[Frenchparents]

I agree wholeheartedly as the manager of a small nonprofit information and
networking platform: Frenchparents.org and the recent victim of a
cybersquatter.(So you'll now find us at frenchparents.net.:-/)

You say UDRP is cheap but it isn't because it still costs a few 1000 $$, and
in case one wins, there are no compensatory damages...

Also, only prejudice to abusive party if.. returning the name! How
dissuasive!:-0

Caroline I-R
SF, CA


on 2/10/04 6:05 PM, Rick Weingarten at rweingarten at ALAWASH.ORG wrote:

> ALA would concur that it is long past time that the UDRP be reviewed.
>
> Rick
>
> Frederick W. Weingarten, Director
> Office for Information Technology Policy
> American Library Association
> 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
> Suite 403
> Washington, DC  20004
> (202) 628-8421
> Fax (202) 628-8424
> rweingarten at alawash.org
>>>> Marc Schneiders <marc at SCHNEIDERS.ORG> 02/10/04 15:52 PM >>>
> A review of the UDRP process was promised for the end of 2000, when
> the UDRP was introduced in 1999. So far it did not materialize.
>
> The UDRP has done some good. It has made it easier for those whose
> trademarks were abused by people after quick gain (so-called
> cybersquatters) to reach a speedy and cheap solution to their problem.
> In more than a few cases, however, the UDRP resulted in decisions,
> people losing a domain, without any real (or even imagined) trademark
> infringement or abuse. In some of these cases there were even free
> speech matters totally ignored by the UDRP 'judges'.
>
> In any legal system some people will be unhappy with some decisions.
> In the UDRP though, many people are unhappy with more than a few
> decisions. There is no real review process in the system. That
> explains part of it, but now I am already pre-empting the discussion I
> would like to start on this list.
>
> The fact that the UDRP review process did not come about, has more
> reasons than just negligence on the part of some bodies within ICANN.
> The interested parties probably feel that the whole thing is too
> dangerous. Rather keep what we have, though imperfect and sometimes
> unjust, than open up a can of worms??
>
> I would like to start some discussion within our constituency, whether
> or not it is a good idea to press ICANN to fulfil its promise to
> review the UDRP. I would like to bring up the topic in the Names
> Council, but only if I am not the only one who thinks there may be
> something to gain.
>
> So shoot, please.
>
> --
> Marc Schneiders (GNSO council rep)
>