[nc-udrp] Multiple Simultaneous Complaints At Different Providers = Registrar Liability

["John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <john@johnberryhill.com>]

From the "there should be a rule" department....

An unprovided-for situation has come up twice now - where different
complainants file complaints at different DRP's against the same domain name.
In the previous situation, both complaints (against broad.com) were
withdrawn, but in the current situation that does not appear to be likely.
For reference, you may note the following two pending cases at WIPO and at
CPR-ADR respectively:

In this corner, we have WIPO with:

D2002-0116
ixp.com
Compliance Review Pending

And in this corner, we have CPR-ADR with:

CPR 0205
ixp.com
Pending

In the event the WIPO panel orders transfer to its complainant and the CPR
panel orders transfer to its complainant, then do the two complainants take
up pistols at dawn?  Arm wrestling?  Coin toss?

Seriously, this puts the concerned registrar in a difficult position.
Neither of the DRP's is required to provide any deference to the other, and
they are both compelled to carry out their duties.  Obviously what will
happen in the event of conflicting orders from the DRP's is that the
registrar is very likely to end up being sued.  One of the objectives of the
Policy was to insulate registrars from suit, which is why Phil Sbarbaro was
instrumental in obtaining the registrar safe harbor of the ACPA.  If the
registrar is put into the position of having to decide which DRP order to
follow, then it undercuts the protection the Policy was intended to provide
for registrars.

A simple "first-filed" rule would suffice to fill this hole.