ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) WIPO Overrules French Court
    posted by michael on Wednesday March 10 2004, @07:29AM

    cedric writes "A recent WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center administrative decision seems to violate French civil procedure.

    The panel ordered the transfer of the domain name. This transfer had previously been prohibited by a French court, according to the administrative decision (point n° 4): "[o]n February 5, 2001, the French "Tribunal de Grande Instance" of Strasbourg, forbade the transfer of the disputed domain name by the S.A.R.L. Neurocim".

    Under French Law, a judgment which is not susceptible to any review which would suspend execution has the force of res judicata (see article 500 of the French Code of Civil Procedure, in English)."



    "If the French decision has not been subject to appeal, it binds the parties, and have effect vis-à-vis third parties. Being a third party, the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center should also have respected the French judicial order..."

     
      ICANNWatch Login  
    Nickname:

    Password:

    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

     
      Related Links  
    · cedric
    · decision
    · in English
    · More Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) stories
    · Also by michael
     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    WIPO Overrules French Court | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 5 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Lousy Headline
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Wednesday March 10 2004, @04:32PM (#13165)
    User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
    A correspondent writes:
    As a result of an action brought by plaintiff, a court rules that A may not use or transfer the name. Apparently in violation of the order, A transfers to B. So the panel gives the name to plaintiff. So your correspondent says that the panel has not honored the order of the French court.

    You cannot honor an order that has already been broken. I think the headline "WIPO overrules French Court" is a bit of a mischaracterization.

    As I wrote the headline (Cedric's was much too long), I should both take the blame, and say that I think this is a fair point...although it's unclear to me whether the fact that one party breaks an order means the order is thus rendered inoperative from then on. That would, I think, in this case be a question of French law.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Boundaries and inclusion
    by hugh on Thursday March 11 2004, @04:21AM (#13168)
    User #3957 Info
    I intentionally use the term boundaries here so as not to sound like a lawyer. But I do mean it in the sense of Jurisdiction. Absent some type of seperate agreement - treaty. Generally speaking a court will only have jurisdiction over the things (res) or persons (persona) which are before it (within it's jurisdiction) Here it would appear that the French court has jurisdiction over a name (arguably the res) and the persons within France. If the name is a right in a process that is performed outside of France, well one can see that this is a problem. If Jurisdiction can be conferred through a contract for services (extrajudiciary) i.e. arbitration clauses, well then a whole other set of standards apply and restrict jurisdiction for a purpose. No there most certainly is no overturning or overruling here - but it was a catchy headline.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:i'm firmly with amadeu on that immediate goal
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Wednesday March 10 2004, @06:39PM (#13166)
    User #2810 Info
    Is there any chance of you just providing a link to this instead of copying and pasting it in a misformatted format that gives me a headache? Despite my spidey senses tingling, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that once I can process it cogently it won't still give me a headache. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com