| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Barcelona.com Decision Reversed on Appeal
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 10 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
|
Actually, sending it back to the lower court is standard in an appeal as the court of appeal decides questions of law, and usually doesn't actually order people to do things -- it just tells the trial court what rules to use. [If you were suggesting that the Court of Appeal might have sent this to WIPO, that's procedurally impossible: court cases following UDRP actions are technically a new cause of action, not an "appeal" as such, and there is no procedure for a court remanding to a private body.]
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
While I certainly disagreed with the ridiculous Barcelona.com decision, I do not believe WIPO is corrupt or that most of the decisions that result there are unfair. It must be remembered that Barcelona.com was a single-member panel decision. Almost every other city domain name case was ruled in favor of the domain owner. In fact in the recent 3-member panel decision in Madrid.com, Barcelona.com was not followed -- and Marino Porzio (the panelist in Barcelona.com) went along with the panel in ruling favor of the registrant against the City Council of Madrid. Keep in mind that other recent geographic domain name cases such as Puertorico.com and Newzealand.com were also ruled in favor of the domain name owner -- and Newzealand.com was ruled reverse domain name hijacking against the government. Take away the clear cases of cybersquatting on famous marks and you will see that the decisions often go in favor of the domain owner. The UDRP is essentially fair and it provides both the trademark owner and domain registrant with an inexpensive means of resolving disputes -- and the domain owner does not risk the money damages that would be at stake in a court action.
Barcelona.com was clearly an exception. The UDRP rules provided for a right of appeal to court. That is what occurred here and, despite a ridiculous result in the District Court, justice appears to have ultimately prevailed. The system has worked.
Ari Goldberger
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
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
|
