[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] Reuters: Net name dispute body gets first case
You wrote:
>
> While I have still have remaining concerns about the UDRP, keeping the
> identities of the parties quiet for the first 20 days is not among > them.
You support ICANN secretiveness, then? I'm surprised.
> Think of it as a cooling off period, during which the parties can discuss
> settlement and the domain name registrant can decide what it wants to do
> outside the pressurized environment of public scrutiny.
Rather, I consider it a free shot for the trademark holder cum
plaintiff, who now can attack through the UDRP with intent to hijack
without risking opprobrium.
> And it's only 20
> days.
20 days is 20 days too long. It is 20 days during which a defendent
is subject to attack, alone and in silence. I have seen too many
times the frightened and confused reactions of the persons who
receive the subreptitious attacks of hijackers to pass in silence
these attempts to hide what is going on. Let it be public! Let all
know what is happening! Let the victim know that he or she is not
unknown to the world, that there are others watching, that there may
be support to withstand the attacks of the rich and powerful,
support in numbers and in public opinion!
> Eventually, the identity of the parties and decision itself (See,
> Section 16(b) of Rules) will be made public.
Too late! After the harm has been done!
It amazes me to hear a lawyer like yourself condoning and justifying
secretiveness of proceedings. You have let yourself be tricked by
ICANN's argument that it is done to protect the defendant. Lies! It
is to protect the trademark/hijacker from public disapproval.
You are an American lawyer, committed by oath to uphold the law.
Well, the law of this land, which is the land where these rules and
these procedures are being made, obliges adversarial litigation, and
especially when that litigation is of public consequence, like in
the present circumstances, to be done publicly. For you to defend an
abrogation of the laws you are sworn to uphold and defend is a lapse
of your professional duty.
Think about it.
============================================================
Michael Sondow I.C.I.I.U. http://www.iciiu.org
Tel. (718)846-7482 Fax: (603)754-8927
============================================================