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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    WIPO Arbitrator Says Criticism=Bad Faith | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 13 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.
    Re: WIPO Arbitrator Says Criticism=Bad Faith
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Tuesday July 17 2001, @06:23AM (#1423)
    User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
    I agree he screwed up; but the fact remains that if the elements of the case are not proved, it should fail.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: WIPO Arbitrator Says Criticism=Bad Faith
    by Anonymous on Wednesday July 18 2001, @03:03AM (#1430)
    Granted, this is a bad decision. There are some pretty lame decisions on both sides. Take a look at the recently released Go2StateFarm.com case (NAF Case 97182) & BaltimoreGasandElectric.com Case (WIPO D2001-0315). The respondents won both cases. Go 2 Systems is a cybersquatter that registers domain names with famous marks attached to Go2 or Goto, and the Baltimore Gas case should have been a slam dunk win against the respondent. See, it happens on both sides. And, of course, there's the BruceSpringsteen.com decision.

    I happen to think that Reg Vardy should have lost the case. We'll see if it gets cited to in other decisions.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: WIPO Arbitrator Says Criticism=Bad Faith
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 19 2001, @03:35AM (#1443)
    Does anyone have any other suggestions for questionable decisions? I've heard all about Madonna.com, Crew.com, and Barcelona.com, so how about some lesser known but equally bad UDRP decisions?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: WIPO Arbitrator Says Criticism=Bad Faith
    by mjrippon on Friday July 27 2001, @01:13AM (#1499)
    User #2960 Info
    I don't agree. At the very least, an arbitrator should be able to apply the facts as he finds them to the law (or in this case, the Policy) as it stands. In the Reg Vardy case, the panellist utterly failed to do this. Instead he took accepted facts and applied them to what he thought the policy ought to be.

    In the Reg Vardy decision, the arbitrator found that the site was set up to disrupt the business of the Reg Vardy Group. There can be little question that the site was originally set up to voice the respondent's gripe against Reg Vardy was genuine, and although the respondent did not contribute to the process, the panellist did (as he should) look at the site for himself before reaching his opinion.

    Having accepted that the initial complain is genuine, further consideration is irrelevant. Reg Vardy may not like the fact that the criticism of it is particularly unpleasant, or that the use of it's mark is not distinguished by the use of a "-sucks" suffix. However the fact that the site may be guilty of bad taste does not make it's proprieter guilty of bad faith. And the use or otherwise of an appropriate distinguishing feature in the domain name is not a bad faith consideration at all.

    In this case the panellist stated:

    "The Complainant is not a competitor of the Respondent. Nevertheless, in all the circumstances the Panel finds that the Respondent's registration of the domain names is primarily for the purpose of disrupting the Complainant's business with the objective of causing harm and nuisance to the Complainant. In the Panel's view this constitutes bad faith."

    Well this may be the Panel's view, but it isn't the UDRP's view. If those that drafted the Policy intended to include amongst the definition of bad faith all those who seek to disrupt another's business, they wouldn't have used the words "for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor". It's not like it would have been difficult to draft it differently.

    Most of the trouble with the UDRP isn't with the Policy itself, it's with it's interpretation by panellists who have to answer for their decisions to noone. All we need is a public appeals process and this problem will disappear.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: The altitude should not be a fact being consid
    by Anonymous on Tuesday August 14 2001, @04:59AM (#1818)
    So you are saying all the bad decisions are made because the
    respondent has a bad altitude. Let us assume the guy
    is stupid and his IP is 68 making him not eligible
    for electric chair. Can you take his altitude
    into consideration when you brew a decision?

    Ok, Let us say Parisi knows how to say the nice
    words when he responds. However, do you think that
    will guarantee he wins every case? Do you know
    the gentleman actually lost NetLearning.com under
    the dispute policy? (Parisi strokes and file a law
    suit, still pending)

    When an innocent person is complained about, he will
    surely anger. A good judgement is based on pure facts
    not the way to present the facts, or some irrelevant
    comments.

    JohnR
    DomainManual.com
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    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