Re: [ga] Re: Weikers position on UDRP

["Louise Ferguson" <louise.f@ntlworld.com>]

Harald wrote:
>
> One reason for the UDRP going for low fees was to make the process
> available also to small companies who were victims of abusive domain name
> registration.

Sure. But a company also usually pays lawyers several thousand $ to prepare
the case. In the Barcelona case I'd say the council probably spent >$30K (it
also filed 14 trademark applications identical to domain names in 3
different countries just before the complaint, in support of its complaint).
>
> The UDRP discussions at WIPO focused a lot on getting the simple cases out
> of the way fast; the complex cases where > 10 documents were filed as
> evidence were intended to be moved to the normal legal system.

In barcelona.com each side filed >60 'documents'. One 'document' filed by
the complainant consisted of 5 court decisions (each many pages) in 3
different languages. The panellist requested 3 extensions and still
delivered late.
>
> I think one of the failures of the UDRP is that the panelists have handed
> out decisions where they should have been saying "this is too complex to
> decide under the UDRP".

Agreed. But there is nothing in the rules or regs that I know of providing
for such a possible court of action in situations of 'size of the case',
only where the complaint is deemed inappropriate for UDRP in terms of it
being a commercial conflict (and in any case the document pack is delivered
to the panellist weeks after the complaint is formally accepted by WIPO).
Again, I really think there needs to be a filter mechanism before the case
goes to a panellist.
For a case to get a panellist hearing the complainant only has to
a) write a cheque for $1,500
b) provide a name, address and e-mail
c) write a complaint making a claim under the 3 criteria (could be 1/2 page
and then cut and paste the 'formal stuff').
In barcelona.com WIPO took just 15 minutes between receiving the complaint,
checking for 'technical compliance' and formally filing it with the domain
owner, so you could probably write anything and get it through.
That ANY such complaint automatically gets a panellist hearing, having
fulfilled the 'technical requirements' (the one that seems to concern WIPO
most is the cash), justs opens the door wide to opportunists.
I think complainants with weak cases are deliberately going for UDRP becasue
they know they will lose in court - not necessarily for financial reasons.
Many complainants are anything but poor, but the domain owners often are, so
complainants can be pretty sure that if they win at UDRP there will be no
follow-up court case.
Louise
>
>                  Harald
>

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html