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)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Dan's Dispute Resolution Procedure (DDRP) | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 58 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.
    NAF UDRP PANELISTS ARE HEREBY PROVEN TO BE CORRUPT
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Tuesday June 04 2002, @04:02PM (#6822)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Dan's Dispute Resolution Procedure (DDRP)
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Tuesday June 04 2002, @10:54PM (#6828)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    Actually, I realise Michael (Dan) was trying his hardest to be humoro(u)s and - to a large extent - he clearly succeeded!

    However, as the saying goes, MUCH TRUTH IS SAID IN JEST.

    Michael points out the paradoxes of polarised and prejudiced Panelists and the varying degrees and varying levels of morality and immorality of the pratice of 'CyberSquatting.'

    (I personally hate that term being applied to non-CyberSquatters and think it is even illogical when applying it to actual CyberSquatters... Think about it. Squatters don't buy property, nor do they even pay rent for it. So-called CyberSquatters do - the domain names they have registered on a first-come, first-served basis are 'their' intellectual property. This is why so many paradoxes and difficulties can be created when registered trademarks or famous names are registered by other than their namesakes or those registering them on their behalf or as a gift of goodwill towards them.)
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    'CYBERSQUATTER' SUES ICANN & NATIONAL ARBITRATION
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Wednesday June 05 2002, @10:34PM (#6873)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    NOTIFICATION OF PENDING LITIGATION


    RE NAF UDRP DECISION - AOL (USA), Inc. v Adrian Paul Miles o/as AD2000D.COM (UK)


    BOTH ICANN AND THE NATIONAL ARBITRATIO FORUM HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED THAT UNLESS THEY OVERTURN OR REVERSE THIS BLATANTLY BIASED, CORRUPT, IRREGULAR AND HIGHLY UNFAIR UDRP DECISION IN THE ABOVE CASE WITHIN 48 HOURS OF THE DECISION'S ANNOUNCEMENT (WHICH IS NECESSARY DUE TO SELF-IMPOSED TIME RESTRAINTS WITHIN ICANN'S UDRP RULES), WE WILL BE SUING BOTH ICANN AND THE NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM FOR BOTH DAMAGES AND COMPENSATION AT LAW FOR BLATANT AND CLEAR FAILURE TO EITHER ENDORSE OR POLICE THEIR OWN RULES, REGULATIONS AND PROCEDURES.


    WRITTEN THIS DAY: 9am BST, JUNE 6, 2002


    BY: MILES, Adrian Paul (Mr.)
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    AD2000D vs. ICANNWatch
    by dtobias (dan@tobias.name) on Thursday June 06 2002, @08:32AM (#6888)
    User #2967 Info | http://domains.dan.info/
    This forum is full of people who are strongly opposed either to the UDRP itself or to the manner in which it's been applied by the resolution providers and panelists. Hence, Mr. AD2000D would have had great opportunity to gain sympathy for his side here, if he hadn't spoiled it by acting in a crackpotted manner. There are good lines of argument to be made against trying to enforce trademarks on domain names without regard to whether their existence or use actually harms the trademark owner (and, as far as I can see, this guy is more of a harmless nuisance than a serious threat to anybody), and certainly at least some of his names are sufficiently generic ("AIM" is used as a word or acronym in many contexts, e.g., for the American Indian Movement, and hence is a very weak mark) that it's questionable whether the UDRP ought to have ordered them taken away from him.

    However, rather than stick to the reasonable lines of argument, he instead makes all sorts of wild, unsubstantiated accusations of corruption, goes off on long rambling tangents with irrelevancies and sometimes just plain incorrect facts -- for instance, he repeatedly asserts that domain registrars normally only sell in bulk to resellers rather than to individuals and businesses actually intending to use their domains, while this may perhaps be true of BulkRegister, with which he deals himself, it's certainly not true of most of the other registrars, who sell and actively market to individual registrants.

    By acting like a kook, he's given up the natural support he might otherwise have been expected to find here.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Dan's Dispute Resolution Procedure (DDRP)
    by hofjes on Tuesday June 04 2002, @05:38AM (#6807)
    User #60 Info
    It's interesting how those happy with the UDRP are always "anonymous" on this site.

    Similiarly, those generally happy with ICANN are always "anonymous".

    So embarrased, or so desired to be incognito, that they cannot even register a pseudonym.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Dan's Dispute Resolution Procedure (DDRP)
    by ross (rossattucowsdatcam) on Tuesday June 04 2002, @06:57AM (#6809)
    User #3098 Info
    I suppose that I should have read the intro first - I thought he was describing the UDRP ;)
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Dan's Dispute Resolution Procedure (DDRP)
    by RFassett on Tuesday June 04 2002, @08:00AM (#6812)
    User #3226 Info | http://www.enum.info
    the fact that ICANN has not moved forward with registry competition (TLD expansion) shows that UDRP has proven to be part of an unstable solution in protecting Intellectual Property as this relates to registrations at the second level. There is really no other conclusion to draw than this. It's not so much that every case brought before UDRP must be judged "correctly" (as no system is perfect all of the time), it's a matter that the UDRP mechanism in general does not provide the type of stable environment necessary to allow market place competition. For this reason, I am not sure how anyone can state that "UDRP works well". In fact, it is a statement that is not possible to be true otherwise IP concerns would be considered properly addressed and competition moving forward.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: And furthermore...
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Tuesday June 04 2002, @11:10PM (#6831)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    True.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: And furthermore...
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Tuesday June 04 2002, @11:11PM (#6832)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    True also.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Creative Domain Names and Corporate Clowns
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Tuesday June 04 2002, @11:17PM (#6834)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    Yep. I agree.

    Oi, NICE name, mate! Think we'll 'ave that off ya ta' very much!! (*thud* *wack*)

    Many (not all!) corporate big business are simply BIG BULLIES who protect one anothers' backs and cling together at Trademark Conventions, plotting how to destry small business and merge their businesses to squash fair competition.

    So what should we do about it?

    Get a couple of stones and a sling, if you've got the guts! (*nb. not literally, but figurately and spiritually, of course*)
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Anonymous and Incognito Posters
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Tuesday June 04 2002, @11:21PM (#6836)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    What have they got to hide??

    Who do they represent?

    For example, I am persoanlly firmly convinced that one of the Panelists in my UDRP Case with AOL published defamatory and slanderous comments on this site's forum, which are mostly all still here for all to see! (*you can clearly make up your own minds who the 'real' loser is* LOL)
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: 'thing thing'??
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Tuesday June 04 2002, @11:25PM (#6837)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    wot on earth is a 'thing thing' please?!?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 3 replies 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