Will ICANN legal exposure lessen or widen in future?

[Alex Gakuru]

--
"in pursuance of Article IV, Section 3(12) of the Bylaws, ICANN shall
be responsible for bearing all costs of the IRP Provider. Each party
shall bear its own attorneys' fees. Therefore, the administrative fees
and expenses of the International Centre for Dispute Resolution,
totaling $4,500.00, shall be borne entirely by ICANN, and the
compensation and expenses of the Independent Review Panel, totaling
$473,744.91, shall be borne entirely by ICANN. ICANN shall accordingly
reimburse ICM Registry with the sum of $241,372.46, representing that
portion of said fees and expenses in excess of the apportioned costs
previously incurred by ICM Registry.

Note the financial portion of the judgement. ICANN, which has already
had a budget overrun, gets hit again, this time for nearly half a
million dollars.
....
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100220_xxx_saga_continues/

Recent study indicated that over 70 of domains have wrong information.
What does it mean for ICANN as regards the URS and Trademark
Clearinghouse as currently stands? I hope now not widens ICANN's
exposure to future trademark litigations?

Glad to read that our STI team comments state we never supported
either from the onset.
http://forum.icann.org/lists/sti-report-2009/msg00070.html

Below is bad news to consumers because in the end, they will bear the
suits costs via increased fees to ICANN passed on to them translating
to higher domain prices. The winners are trademarks litigants which is
why I believe RFC 1591 had been written.

Alex