[ga-tm] Motion #6: UDRP review
From: Milton Mueller <email@example.com>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 23:33:36 -0400
Subject: Motion #6: UDRP review
Proposed for discussion at Stockholm meeting
As policy advice, the Non-commercial constituency
submits to the Names Council and the ICANN Board the
following ideas for improving the UDRP:
1. Domain name registrations that have been held by
the same administrative contact for three years should
be exempted from challenges under the UDRP.
2. We note that statistical studies of the UDRP have
shown that "forum shopping" by complainants exists in
the application of the UDRP. This biases the results
and needs to be changed. We encourage exploration of
the following remedies:
2a: ICANN could provide domain name holders
with some form of a declaratory judgment. Domain name
holders should be able to initiate a UDRP proceeding,
using the dispute resolution service provider of their
choice, to obtain a finding that they have a "right
and legitimate interest" in a name. Prospective
complainants would be given a period of time to
contest the claim.
2b. Registrars, rather than complainants,
could select the dispute resolution provider. Such a
selection should be done not on a case-by-case basis,
but through contracts that would apply in a non-
discriminatory fashion to all names registrered by
3. We note with great concern that one US court has
decided that a respondent has no right to appeal a
decision by a UDRP panel to transfer a name.* If this
becomes a precedent, the procedural and substantive
aspects of the UDRP need to be substantially revised.
4. We oppose any extension of the UDRP to new rights
in names, such as rights of personality, geographic
place, and so on. The domain name system is a method
of giving mnemonic names to Internet resources and of
mapping information to those names. The proces of
assigning domain names should not become overly
burdened with regulations and legal and political
baggage. Such a linkage of domain name assignment to
global legal rights is inimical to the Internet's
growth, freedom and stability.
* Judge Young (Mass District Court, USA) held that no
declaratory judgment was available to
the registrant of corinthians.com, including under the
ACPA, if the victorious party in the UDRP (the
trademark holder) disclaimed any intention to file a
trademark lawsuit of his own. There being exactly that
disclaimer, he then dismissed the case for failure to
state a claim.
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-tm" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html