Re: [ICANN-EU] The real challenge for all of us as candidates

[Marc Schneiders <marc@venster.nl>]

Dear Giorgio,

I don't think the UDRP is bad in itself. Nor that its mandatory character
is bad. It would be useless without it. The way in which the UDRP is put
into practice is where the problems arise, in my view of matters. 

Like so many good and necessary instruments UDRP has been turned into an
easy way to rob legitimate owners of their property and/or platform.  The
IP/TM lobby has succeeded in getting this done by WIPO, which they 'own'.
Of course it is the IP/TM lobby's privilige to look after their interests
and choose the bodies that will be most helpfull to do just that. It is my
right to say the UDRP needs to change in the way it is applied.

Only cases that fall clearly under the definitions of the UDRP should
succeed. An end should be put immediately to those arbitrators who invent
their own rules. Just one example: There is no such thing as a "more
legitimate right" to a domain, upon which the ruling in the Barcelona.COM
case is based. It is not in the UDRP and it is impossible to base an
objective decision upon whatever way you look at it.

Stop this and I'll defend UDRP vigorously. As long as cases like
Barcelona.COM are every week in the news, "UDRP" will be to me like a
curse. There is a small comfort for those who, like myself, like to
believe that systematic use of injust means will in the end turn against
those who gained by them at first. But then, the IP/TM lobby has never
been known to look very far into the future.

Marc

--
Marc Schneiders ------- Venster - http://www.venster.nl 
 marc@venster.nl - marc@bijt.net - marc@schneiders.org
 


On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Griffini Giorgio wrote:

> 
> Dear Andreas an Marc,
> 
> (I will wear the Italian Naming Authority member hat now) 
> 
> I was working on this specific subject for almost one year long and I was a 
> strong supporter (really fighting) for introducing a sort of Mandatory 
> Administrative Proceeding on rules for '.it' ccTLD.  
> I suggest Andreas to take a look to the Final WIPO report instead of  relying 
> on reading separate documents. By reading the WIPO report you will see by 
> yourself that arbitration and mediation are just two ways to handle disputes 
> and you will understand why is the 'Mandatory' approach for the 
> Administrative Proceeding (which is the third way ) is by far more appropriate 
> to handle 'abusive' registrations. 
> I think you will be even wonder on the level of concern there is on fact that 
> domain name registration protections from abuse should be granted to non 
> trademark owners. 
> 
> Under the ccTLD'.it'  we had a voluntary arbitration available for almost one 
> year but it was really clear (almost to me) that when two parties are in good 
> faith disputing for a name there is generally no problem. 
> When one of the parties is in 'bad faith'  having such 'voluntary' arbitration is 
> not enough to avoid court litigation because one want to solve and the other 
> wants to steal...
> 
> When opening the '.it'  registration to any european citizen as we did 
> (broadening the number of potential registrant that way ) a way to really 
> handle abusive registration HAD to be in place. I made any kind pressure for 
> having it as early as possible even by asking to postpone date for 'opening'.  
> I have been talked as a people that was not endorsing 'opening' to Europe.
> A little bit later the history was on my side. Our fellow candidate Francesco 
> Ravanelli was a victim of this miss in the '.it' rules  (as you may see on his 
> profile)
> 
> In summary,  for those of you which are concerned with UDRP I really 
> suggest to take a look to the final WIPO report. 
> Maybe it will not change your idea but I may assure you 
> that you will not waste your time reading it.
> 
> Best Regards 
> Giorgio Griffini 
> 
> (removing the Italian Naming Authority member hat now and restarting to 
> battle for endorsements... :)
> 
>