[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ICANN-EU] The real challenge for all of us as candidates
- To: Andreas Fügner <Andreas.Fuegner@lizenz.com>
- Subject: Re: [ICANN-EU] The real challenge for all of us as candidates
- From: Marc Schneiders <marc@venster.nl>
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:56:55 +0200 (MEST)
- cc: icann-europe@fitug.de
- Comment: This message comes from the icann-europe mailing list.
- In-Reply-To: <002201c00d07$a3464f00$0b0aa8c0@f-gner>
- Sender: owner-icann-europe@fitug.de
Sweet Andreas,
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Andreas Fügner wrote:
> Dearest Marc:
>
> >There is nothing voluntary to being a respondent in a case. Sure you
> >cannot respond, but that means immediate chorusses of "bad faith bad
> >faith". Not responding means the allegations of the complainant are
> >excepted as evidence without further investigation. And the so-called
> >arbitration takes its course anyway. You call than voluntarily?
>
>
> Of corse, not responding is NOT the appropiate reaction.
> And this would be a rather childish behavier, sorry!
> The proper reply is, that one does not participate in
> and accept mediation or arbitration.
Huh? Every domain name owner has the obligation to accept UDRP. You agree
to it when you register a domain. (This may be different to some extent
for those registered before UDRP was introduced. But they are 'settled'
under UDRP as well in practice anyway.)
> >Give me ONE case where a victim succeeded in refusing to undergo UDRP.
>
> Please, look up the list of cases at WIPO. You will find cases,
> that were canceled or withdrawn. Are there many? No! Why?
Cancelled or withdrawn because of what? Because of the refusal of the
respondent? Because that and only that is what we are talking about. Give
me one, don't tell me to search through a long list. *You* said there are.
Tell me which. *You* claimed that UDRP is voluntarily for both parties.
Give me just one case to back up your assertion! The proof of your words
is upon you, not me.
> Because_mediation/arbitration_is_better_then_directly_going_to_court.
About which I agree in theory, the way WIPO handles it is the problem.
Some modifications, including but not limited to an appeal under UDRP, are
necessary.
> Which, for weeks now, is my one and only argument.
No, this is not true. You say that UDRP is voluntarily. Back up what you
say. OK?
--
Marc Schneiders ------- Venster - http://www.venster.nl
marc@venster.nl - marc@bijt.net - marc@schneiders.org