Re:RE: [nc-udrp] Authoritative Texts of UDRP Decisions

[pphillips@cpradr.org]

CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution has always regarded the texts of URDP
decisions to be public domain, for copying, reformatting, anthologizing or
extract in the same way that federal court cases are.  

F. Peter Phillips
Senior Vice President
CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution
Tel:  212-949-6490
Fax: 212-949-8859


____________________Reply Separator____________________
Subject:    RE: [nc-udrp] Authoritative Texts of UDRP Decisions
Author: CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com
Date:       2/6/02 11:20 AM

Louis was copied on the original email, but I will send him a formal request
for ICANN's position.  Will the Provider representatives on this Task Force
send us their positions. Thanks

-----Original Message-----
From: J. Scott Evans [mailto:jse@adamspat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 7:39 AM
To: Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law; nc-udrp@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [nc-udrp] Authoritative Texts of UDRP Decisions


All:

Let's not make a mountain out of a mole hill.  I say let's ask Louis his
position.  We could also send a formal e-mail or letter from the Task Force
each provider for which we do not have a clear answer.  This will allow us
to collect the necessary information to formulate a position in our
recommendations to the NC.

J. Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
To: <nc-udrp@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 8:30 AM
Subject: RE: [nc-udrp] Authoritative Texts of UDRP Decisions


> [cc's trimmed]
>
> It seems clear to me that we should in our revisions require that the
> decisions be subject to something like the copyleft license.
>
> On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
>
> > It was always my impression that the Copyright to those decisions
belonged
> > to ICANN (although I admit that this was never explicitly stated in
> > writing).  Someone may have done this already, but has anyone called
> > eresolution to see if we could get the decisions, or if the decisions
can be
> > hosted elsewhere, or even if they would claim infringement if we copied
> > them?
> >
> > I know we have tried to address this problem in .us in that we are
requiring
> > that the decisions be sent to NeuStar to keep on file in the event that
this
> > happens.  For .biz, we are requesting copies of the STOP proceedings as
> > well.
> >
> > I do believe that eresolution's decisions should also be made publicly
> > available.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Berryhill [mailto:john@johnberryhill.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 11:54 PM
> > To: nc-udrp@dnso.org
> > Cc: halloran@icann.org; touton@icann.org
> > Subject: [nc-udrp] Authoritative Texts of UDRP Decisions
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I find the silence on the question of copyright in UDRP opinions from
the
> > DRP representatives to be somewhat baffling, as the question has taken
on
> > some urgency.  It's a simple question which merits a yes or no answer.
> >
> > As of today, the plug appears to have been pulled on eresolution.ca.
Hence,
> > there is now no authoritative source of the text of any eResolution
> > decision, and all of the links from the ICANN UDRP index to eResolution
> > decisions are now broken.  This may come as some relief to certain
attorneys
> > in New York who were sanctioned by a federal judge this month for having
> > brought the cello.com UDRP proceeding in violation of the final order in
> > _Cello Holdings v. Lawrence-Dahl Companies_.
> >
> > I have become aware that several individuals have privately backed up
copies
> > of these decisions, and have offered to make them available to me on the
> > condition that I not identify them, since these individuals do not want
to
> > be accused of copyright infringement.  This is a ridiculous way to
practice
> > law - citation by Napster.
> >
> > On the upside, though, I guess we are all free to amend the text of
these
> > decisions as needed to fit, since nothing cited from an eResolution
decision
> > can be checked against an authoritative text.
> >
> > The ICANN-DRP agreement, which requires DRPs to post their decisions, is
> > obviously flawed in that it fails to contemplate the possibility of a
DRP
> > going belly-up.  While I realize that a similar vulnerability exists due
to
> > ICANN's failure to implement a registar data escrow system for domain
> > registrations, surely it is not a great burden for the authoritative
text of
> > UDRP decisions to be maintained by ICANN, rather than in potentially
> > unstable proprietary databases.
> >
> > WIPO posts an express disclaimer on the website which permits copying.
The
> > NAF website has no terms of use at all.  CPR-ADR and the Asian DRP
coming
> > online are too insignificant to worry about.
> >
> > Tim?  Does the NAF claim a copyright in NAF UDRP decisions?
> >
> > Jim?  Does the NAF require you to sign a release when you write one?
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
> A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
> U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
> +1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
>                         -->It's warm here.<--
>
>