What's Worse Than WIPO? (Hint - they're doing .kids.us)
Date: Tuesday August 12 2003, @08:01PM
Topic: Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)

What's worse than WIPO? That's easy: NAF. WIPO, give it its due, is showing some signs of real sanity in the broad run of its decisions, ironically after quietly firing arbitrators not thought to be 'sound' enough in their pro-trademark leanings.

So pity the poor folks who get chucked out of .kids.us because they run afoul of the content restrictions. According to Warren's Washington Internet Daily, which doesn't appear to put much content online) their only recourse (so far) will be NAF.

In one sense it isn't surprising: .kids.us was likely to prefer a US-based dispute provider to a Geneva-based one. Especially for matters relating to content control.

In another way it's both shocking and interesting: The Dot Kids Implementation & Efficiency Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-317), requires "A process to provide registrants to the new domain with an opportunity for a prompt, expeditious, and impartial dispute resolution process regarding any material of the registrant excluded from the new domain."

Sure sounds like the basis for a private right of action if, say, just hypothetically, you could show that the dispute provider was (perish the thought)...a little one-sided or even biased.

Why does NeuStar (the .kids.us operator) subject its customers to NAF? Does it know what it's getting into by choosing NAF for content disputes? Note that NAF's contract with NeuLevel isn't exclusive, so it's possible that NeuLevel will select additional dispute providers in the futuree. Indeed for "usDRP" cases (the .us version of the UDRP), NeuLevel allows the use of either NAF or the reputable American Arbitration Association. It's also notable that the Dot Kids Implementation and Efficiency Act lacks a direct requirement of "a prompt, expeditious, and impartial dispute resolution process" for the usDRP...

The deadline for 'sunrise' applications to .kids.us is this Friday, Aug. 15, by the way.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
What's Worse Than WIPO? (Hint - they're doing .kids.us) | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 2 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.
[OT] Published decisions
by Rossa (r.mcmahonNO@SPAModron.org) on Wednesday August 13 2003, @01:20AM (#12040)
User #3430 Info | http://www.odron.org/
This is a little off-topic, but I was wondering:

I recently read this at the UDRP provider accreditation page:

[Applicants must provide ICANN with] "A description of how the applicant intends to publish decisions of panels in proceedings it administers and a commitment to provide ICANN with copies of all portions of decisions of panels not published." Link [icann.org]

Anyone know anything about this? Are there unpublished decisions around - and why would ICANN envisage a system where some decisions wouldn't be published?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]




This article comes from ICANNWatch
http://www.icannwatch.org/

The URL for this story is:
http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=03/08/12/0312227