[ga] Re: [ga-udrp] UDRP Questionnaire

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Should non legacy TLD use the UDRP?

If you say not, it means that the money advantage obtained by NSI from this 
system is more important than TM Holders rights.

If you say yes, it means they should participate to the debate as such...

Jefsey


On 10:04 30/06/01, DannyYounger@cs.com said:
>The questions cited below have been put forth by Milton Mueller, and seem to
>be a good starting point.
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/tor-udrp/Arc00/bin00000.bin
>
>001.    To what extent are panel decisions consistent with applicable law?
>002.    Are decisions consistent across panelists and dispute resolution
>service providers, and if not, what can be done about it?
>003.    Is the potential for abuse of claimed common law rights so great that
>the policy should be limited to registered marks?
>004.    Should generic names, geographical names, initials and numbers be
>protected from claims by any trademark or name rights' owner, regardless of
>the owner's fame?
>005.    Is the high respondent default rate due to a lack of real and timely
>notice of complaints and/or a lack of time to respond?
>006.    Do complainants and respondents have parity in post-UDRP access to
>the courts?
>007.    Should the ability to challenge a name under the UDRP expire after a
>single registrant has held the name for a specified period of time?
>008.     Should there be an internal review mechanism (such as an appeal
>panel drawn from all the Providers) to overturn clearly erroneous decisions
>without resorting to courts?
>009.    Does Complainant selection of the resolution service provider lead to
>"forum shopping" that tends to bias decisions against Respondents?
>010.    Should registrars, rather than complainants, pre-select the
>Provider(s) to whom all disputes over names registered with them will be
>referred?
>011.    Do policies for accrediting or de-accrediting dispute resolution
>service providers need to be specified in greater detail? Are any providers'
>supplemental rules inconsistent with either due process and/or the ICANN
>rules?
>012.    Should the UDRP be amended to enable respondents to initiate a
>"declaratory judgment" regarding their "rights and legitimate interests" in a
>name?
>
>What other questions should be added to this list?
>--
>This message was passed to you via the ga-udrp@dnso.org list.
>Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga-udrp" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
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