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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    Study Documents Provider Biases in ICANN-UDRP Arbitrator Selection | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 12 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.
    Hey Lynn
    by Anonymous on Monday August 20 2001, @04:20AM (#1952)
    Lynn,

    UDRP abuses as evidenced in this study burn me up.

    Is this another matter ICANN feels it can justify slow examination and action therein?

    If someone were to come after any one of my generic domains with WIPO ruling in favor of the complaintant, I would A) seek appeal in the courts, and 2) sue ICANN for negligence.

    You know full well WIPO and the other arbitration bodies are going way over board. They know it as well. And until you pull in your Nazi dogs, justice and ICANN will belong to two different realms.

    Is there any public interest matter that you truly care about? Or is it all about the Almighty Dollar, the IP Totalitarians, big business and personal self-interest.

    Don't give me your rhetoric about setting up some subcommittee; it will be slow, biased and ineffectual.

    Don't give me your rhetoric about how the UDRP will come under review in several months. It is already long overdue.

    Don't give me your rhetoric about WIPO and the others being concerned about justice and fairness. You are not. You never were and never will be. You feel you are immune.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Study Documents Provider Biases in ICANN-UDRP
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Monday August 20 2001, @08:19PM (#1964)
    User #2810 Info
    Reuters coverage via Yahoo including a NAF response.

    Michael, is the panelist paid less if it is a default judgement?

    This also gives me the opportunity to point out something I found strange while researching the armani.com case. IANAP but it seems like double jeopardy with the case(s) [1, 2] of armaniexchange.net, or an appeal route I wasn't previously aware existed. I wonder how a losing respondent could have an equal right to a second hearing, when a second hearing appears to only be triggered by a 're-filing'. Oh, and money of course. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Study Documents Provider Biases in ICANN-UDRP
    by LawGeek (mcd@NOSPAM.pair.com) on Tuesday August 21 2001, @02:43AM (#1967)
    User #2921 Info
    Perhaps this study wouldn't be so concerning (if one is ready to accept the proposition that most of the cases brought under the UDRP are examples of "cybersquatting"), except for the fact that UDRP panelists seem to have virtually no understanding of US trademark principles whatsoever.

    It is absolutely ridiculous what these fools get away with and pass off as supportable under existing trademark law. True, the UDRP is a rule system in itself and is not perfectly congruent with US trademark law, but it incorporates verbatim certain important principles which have been defined by judges.

    In any event, the UDRP sets up a system of "justice" that is so horridly crippled in its ability to be self-correcting, consistent, or fair, that this concrete news of bias/forum-shopping is incredibly frightening.

    And, of course, there's always the alleged review of the UDRP that ICANN claims to be doing, but that we all know will be about as forthcoming and timely as a Microsoft review of its anti-competitive behavior.

    MD
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Study Documents Provider Biases in ICANN-UDRP
    by MF_Inc on Tuesday August 21 2001, @08:26AM (#1970)
    User #3001 Info
    The UDRP Needs MAJOR Reform.

    I am very pleased to see this newly-released report by Michael Geist. Several months ago, I got a very embittering crash-course in the UDRP process. The conclusion I arrived at is that the UDRP needs MAJOR REFORM. I am the registrant of the Tobacco.com domain name. I have been since 1995. Earlier this year, I received a "cease and desist" letter from a "company" calling itself "Tobacco.com, Inc.". This "entity" was nothing more than a bogus (as in fraudulent) culmination of several pieces of filled-out paperwork, in an attempt to superficially "legitimize" themselves. They attempted to reverse domain name hijack Tobacco.com, by way of their filing a UDRP against myself. To make a long story short... I immediately sought Counsel with John Berryhill, an expert-attorney in the area of trademark law and, one who has a great deal of experience with UDRP defense work. Seeking John Berryhill's aid was the best thing I could have possibly done in this case. On May 18th of this year, they withdrew their complaint against myself. (After seeing my response and realizing their fraud was easily uncovered.) My complaint, then? The UDRP makes it ALL TOO EASY for frivolous and fraudulent complaints to be brought forth. This means the UDRP can easily be used to effectively harass domain name registrants. I spent nearly $3500 defending myself against fraud which, if the UDRP was more intelligently crafted, would have never even been considered as a legitimate case. Personally, I think that generic terms (such as "tobacco") should be completely exempted from UDRP process. To add insult to injury, the NAF (the arbitration panel which was selected to hear the case) ended up keeping my $1250 three-person panel fee, EVEN THOUGH THE PANEL NEVER SAT! To me, that is criminal activity on the behalf of the NAF. ( The Register published a news item on this, specifically, at : http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/19217 .html ) I decided to organize all information related to my case, and publish my findings online. I only hope that what I've assembled can serve to help others who face UDRP injustices. The casework can be seen at : http://Tobacco.com/attempted-hijacking

    Warmest Regards, Michael Fischer
    [ 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