DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: UDRP interim committee

Your concept of limiting the survey sample to "those who have actually 
used the UDRP" or "people who have affirmatively decided not to" 
suggests that the survey would only be performed on trademark holders. Is this correct?

If so, obviously that is an unacceptable method of review and we will
have to come up with a far more inclusive concept of whose opinion we
are interested in. If not, pardon my misinterpretation.

At any rate, it is worth stating explicitly that the DNSO review of the 
UDRP is supposed to represent all stakeholders.
We need to find out what registrars, registries, ordinary domain name holders, and respondents who won and who lost a UDRP case think.

Also, referring to my prior message, you need to explain to me why you 
are doubtful about the value of objective statistical information, but 
interested in generating statistics about highly subjective and imprecise 
variables such as the opinions of users of the UDRP.
>>> "Chicoine, Caroline G." <CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com> 05/04/01 01:23PM >>>
I too wanted the population to be defined and thus wanted to limit it to 
those peoople that have actually used the UDRP, but also those that 
affirmnatively decided not to for a particular reason (the reasons very 
well may be some of the issues raised in the NCDNH's respolutions). I did
not want this to be an esoteric discussion but one based on real 
experiences with the UDRP.  

We may also want to look at the results of the WIPO study released in April.

Miriam, Ken, what are your thoughts.

PS, Milton I have emailed Elisabeth to ask whether we can be set up as an
email group so our emails can be archived.

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>