Comments on: Expanding Interpretation of UDRP Helps German Bank Win ‘Domain Lottery’

By: Paul Keating

Paul Keating — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:16:20 +0000

“You can fight the decision via the court, but the UDRP process is decided by WIPO and others who are “stakeholders” at ICANN.”

Not always the case. The UDRP allows a losing respondent to file a court action and prevent transfer but ONLY if it files within 10 days an action in a court located in the Mutual Jurisdiction (location of registrant or registrar at the election of the complainant). Many jurisdictions do not have a recognized claim for use by the respondent. In such a case the respondent is effectively precluded from taking advantage of UDRP 4(k). In such a case the respondent can file in any court having jurisdiction but must then request an order of the court preventing the UDRP decision from being enforced.

There has been no direct challenge to the UDRP itself (yet) because most courts that do allow a losing respondent to assert a claim do not review the UDRP decision as such but merely make their own determination. That being said, I cannot see a reason why a challenge could not be maintained directly at the UDRP provided the case had good facts in favor of the respondent.

By: Drew

Drew — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:47:06 +0000

>I believe you can fight the decision process but not the decision.

Other way around.

You can fight the decision via the court, but the UDRP process is decided by WIPO and others who are “stakeholders” at ICANN.

Us Registrants aren’t stakeholders. We just pay for the who mess.

By: Fresh Avails

Fresh Avails — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:51:28 +0000

You can appeal the decision to a court but understand that you have agreed to a URDP decision with your registrar. I believe (a lawyer or someone who knows can weigh in here) you can fight the decision process but not the decision. I have heard many times from TM lawyers to make sure to get a multi person panel so that one misinformed person cannot derail the process. I do share the fear that the broader the “bad faith” application gets from it’s inital meaning, the worse it gets for everyone, big and small companies alike.

By: Helder

Helder — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:36:33 +0000

If someone has its domain stolen by a stupid panelist, can’t that someone go to a court of law and suspend that decision, and have the decision taken in a court, by judges who know the law?

Is there any law above UDRP? or they’re above the law and courts?

Everyone is scared of losing domains with UDRP, but is anyone going to court to defend their property rights? Does anyone file a law suit against those panelists and UDRP?

If someone would try to take away your home or land, wouldn’t you fight in a court? why not do the same with domains? domains are your land, your property

This why i like cctld’s, specially european cctld’s, they are ruled by laws, not by some panelists who seem to be above laws and courts

By: jaydee

jaydee — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:37:50 +0000

It is incumbent on the big players in the domain business–those with ample resources to give back to the community an appeal process. I know R. Schwartz was dismayed by the lack of support from the domainers, but pleeeze, we are small potato(e)s without funds or much of voice. So don’t lump us in with those that really can make a difference due to their power. Schwartz, Schilling, Latona, etc, etc, are the ones who must take the lead and put a bit back into the system to protect the whole structure. What the hell can a fellow with 100 mediocre domains do? Stop writing about the UDRP failures and do something about it! I wish I had your money, I would do something about it. You owe it to yourselves and to us indirectly as we are the crowd that fills your stadiums, we are the fans that cheer you along the way, we often pay the tickets to get into the game….

By: FX

FX — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 02:31:14 +0000

this is another clear case of reverse domain name hijacking by a retarded panelist. John Swinson the Sole Panelist in this case should have his legal license revoked and banned from practicing law. He clearly made up his own rules that have no rhyme or reason or legal standing.

By: Drew

Drew — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 20:22:41 +0000

And as long as Registrants remain the only player in the system that does not have any direct representation/control in ICANN, this will continue.

By: Expanding Interpretation of UDRP Helps German Bank Win ‘Domain Lottery’ 168888 Lottery

Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:14:17 +0000

[...] post: Expanding Interpretation of UDRP Helps German Bank Win ‘Domain Lottery’ By admin | category: Lottery? | tags: deutsche-kreditbank, fannie, friday, higher-claims, [...]

By: Tweets that mention Expanding Interpretation of UDRP Helps German Bank Win ‘Domain Lottery’ | Domain Name News -- Topsy.com

Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:36:48 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by snowkitten, DomainNews. DomainNews said: Expanding Interpretation of UDRP Helps German Bank Win ‘Domain Lottery’ http://bit.ly/bo6Mk [...]