Re: [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Materials -URGENT PLEASE REPLY UPON RECEIPT

["Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>]

So would I ;>
PS. Apologies for missing the call. I caught my wife's bug.

On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, M. Scott Donahey wrote:

> I would be happy to prepare an executive summary of Professor Froomkin's
> paper.
> 
> Best regards.
> 
> M. Scott Donahey
> Tomlinson Zisko LLP
> 200 Page Mill Rd.
> Palo Alto, CA  94306
> Phone:  (650) 325-8666
> Fax:      (650) 324-1808
> sdonahey@tzllp.com
> www.tzllp.com
> 
> Our firm name has been changed to Tomlinson Zisko LLP.  My new e-mail
> address is  sdonahey@tzllp.com, although e-mail sent to my old e-mail
> address will continue to be delivered to me.
> 
> This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
> contain confidential and privileged information which is protected by the
> attorney-client privilege or other grounds for confidentiality or
> non-disclosure.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution by
> any means is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please
> contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jse@adamspat.com [mailto:jse@adamspat.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 7:51 AM
> To: nc-udrp@dnso.org; CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com;
> sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com; ndundas@africaip.com; jse@adamspat.com;
> harris@cabase.org.ar; froomkin@law.miami.edu; michael@palage.com;
> philip.sheppard@aim.be; sdonahey@tzllp.com; katsh@legal.umass.edu;
> carmody@lawyer.com; tcole@arb-forum.com; jberryhill@ddhs.com;
> mwaldbaum@salans.com; erik.wilbers@wipo.int; sythesis@videotron.ca;
> joonh@chollian.net; gdinwood@kentlaw.edu; ramesh@mimos.my;
> faia@amauta.rep.net.pe
> Cc: DNSO.SECRETARIAT@dnso.org
> Subject: UDRP Materials -URGENT PLEASE REPLY UPON RECEIPT
> 
> 
> Dear All:
> 
> My apologies again for the technical glitch that kept you all from receiving
> this message yesterday.  As we agreed on the call earlier, please review the
> materials listed in this message and attached
> hereto.  By Wednesday, December 11, 2002, everyone should identify the area
> in which they wish to concentrate their efforts as we distill this
> information.  Essentially, I envision two groups:  1)
> working on the summarizing and identifying issues presented in the 11 papers
> listed below and 2) another group working with the survey responses.
> 
> Please post all discussion to the list.
> 
> Thank you again for your time and dedication.
> 
> Regards.
> 
> J. Scott
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> 
> A. The most current version of the "UDRP Review and Evaluation, Terms
> of Reference" document can be found at
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2001.NC-tor-UDRP-Review-Evaluation.html
> 
> B. DNSO UDRP Questionnaire (includes French and Spanish links) -
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20011107.UDRP-Review-Questionnaire.html
> 
> C. All responses (155) per question can be found at
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/udrp1.txt
> Each individual response per questionnaire can be found at
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/udrp2.txt
> 
> D. ICANN UDRP Questionnaire (see attachment below)
> 
> E. Responses to ICANN Questionnaire (see attachment below)
> 
> F. Task Force summaries (see attachments below)
> Katrina Burchell (1-9, 56-65)
> J. Scott Evans (25-32)
> Maxim H. Waldbaum (108-115)
> Prof. Dr. Hong (124-131)
> M. Scott Donahey (66-73)
> James A. Carmody (82-89)
> Neil Dundas (9-16)
> Jeffrey J. Neuman (17-24)
> Timothy S. Cole (90-98)
> Graeme Dinwoodie (132-140)
> 
> G. Chicoine "summary of summaries" (see attachment)
> In general, I identified the following POTENTIAL areas of reform.
> 
> Procedural Issues
> (1) Make the process of electronic versus paper filing of complaint and
> exhibits more clear.
> (2) Improve searchability of decisions
> (3) Difficulty finding Registrar's rules that applied at the time the
> Registrant registered the domain name
> (4) Improve accuracy, availability and searchability of Whois information
> (5) Improve the effectuation of a transfer/cancellation order
> (6) Revisit who should select provider
> (7) Amendment of complaints under certain limited circumstances
> (8) Amendment of responses under certain limited circumstances
> (9) Transfer of case to another Provider under certain limited circumstances
> (10) Uniformity of supplemental rules
> (11) Public accessibility of complaints and answers with certain
> limitations/exceptions
> (12) Central availability of UDRP decisions
> (13) No refiling of UDRP involving same domain name and same registrant
> except under certain limited circumstances.
> (14) Ability to withdraw complaint, but under certain circumstances and with
> certain consequences (with prejudice, fine)
> (15) instituting some sort of penalty for a finding of reverse domain name
> hijacking
> (16) impose quality control measures with respect to provider and panelists
> (17) allow for partial refund of provider fee depending if and when a case
> settles.
> 
> Substantive Issues
> (1) Interpretation of "identical or confusingly similar to"
> (2) Whether to include some affirmative defenses expressly in the policy
> (3) Mixed view on precedential value of decisions
> (4) Mixed view on ability to appeal (if so, some recommendations included
> same provider, but different panelists; different provider; appealing party
> pays for appeal, but costs for appellant if
> successful; level of deference with respect to findings of fact "abuse of
> discretion and with respect to law" or "de novo")
> (5) changing "registration and use" to "registration or use"
> (6) Allow pending trademark applications as a basis for establishing rights
> in a mark provided use has occurred
> (7) no expansion of scope of disputes handled under UDRP except as set forth
> above
> 
> 
> H. Third party studies/papers.   Caroline could not find a link for the Rose
> Communications, S.L. paper so it is attached.
> 
> (1) ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy" - Causes and
> (Partial) Cures, Prof. A. Michael Froomkin -
> http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/udrp.pdf
> 
> (2) Max Plank Institute Study -
> http://www.intellecprop.mpg.de/Online-Publikationen/2002/UDRP-study-final-02
> ..pdf
> 
> (3) Rough Justice, Prof. Milton Mueller -
> http://www.acm.org/usacm/IG/roughjustice.pdf
> 
> (4) UDRP-A Success Story? A Rebuttal to the Analysis and Conclusions
> of Professor Milton Mueller in Rough Justice, N. Branthover (INTA) -
> http://www.inta.org/downloads/tap_udrp_1paper2002.pdf
> 
> (5) Divergence in the UDRP and the Need for Appellate Review, M.
> Scott Donahey - http://www.udrplaw.net/DonaheyPaper.htm
> 
> (6) Designing Non-National Systems: The Case of the Uniform Domain
> Name Dispute Resolution Policy, L. Helfer and G. Dinwoodie -
> http://www.kentlaw.edu/depts/ipp/intl-courts/docs/dh.pdf
> 
> (7) Fair.com, Prof. Michael Geist -
> http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~geist/geistudrp.pdf
> 
> (8) Fundamentally Fair.com? An Update on Bias Allegations and the
> ICANN UDRP, Prof. Michael Geist -
> http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~geist/fairupdate.pdf
> 
> (9) The UDRP by All Accounts Works Effectively - Rebuttal to
> Analysis and Conclusions of Professor Michael Geist in "Fair.com?" and
> "Fundamentally Fair.com?", INTA Internet Committee -
> http://www.inta.org/downloads/tap_udrp_2paper2002.pdf
> 
> (10) A Response to INTA's Rebuttal of Fair.com (Prof. Michael Geist)
> - http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~geist/geistintaresp.pdf
> 
> (11) Katsh Memo addressed to the Task Force at
> http://www.disputes.org/udrp/
> 
> (12) Patrick L. Jones article at
> http://www.udrplaw.net/UDRPReview1.htm
> 
> 
> Useful web site at
> 
> http://www.udrplaw.net/UDRPReview.htm
> 
> 
> 
> Caroline G. Chicoine - cchicoine@thompsoncoburn.com (IPC)
> Sarah Deutsch - sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com (Business)
> Neil Duncan Dundas - ndundas@africaip.com (ccTLD)
> J. Scott Evans - jse@adamspat.com (Chair)
> Antonio Harris - harris@cabase.org.ar (ISP)
> Michael Froomkin - froomkin@law.miami.edu (NCDNH)
> Michael Palage - michael@palage.com (Registrar)
> Philip Sheppard -philip.sheppard@aim.be (Complainant)
> M. Scott Donahey - msd@tzmm.com (CPR Panelist)
> Ethan Katsh - katsh@legal.umass.edu (eResolution Panelist)
> James A. Carmody - carmody@lawyer.com (NAF Panelist)
> Tim Cole - tcole@arb-forum.com (NAF Provider)
> John Berryhill - jberryhill@ddhs.com (Respondent)
> Maxim Waldbaum - mwaldbaum@salans.com (WIPO Panelist)
> Erik Wilbers - erik.wilbers@wipo.int (WIPO Provider)
> Dan Steinberg - synthesis@videotron.ca (GA Member)
> Joon Hyung Hong - joonh@chollian.net (Independent ADR expert)
> Graeme Dinwoodie - gdinwood@kentlaw.edu (Independent academic expert)
> Ramesh Kumar Nadarajah - ramesh@mimos.my (Independent ADR expert)
> Erick Iriarte - faia@amauta.rcp.net.pe (ccTLD)
> Chirstopher To - christopher@hkiac.org (ADNDRC Provider)
> Dr. Xue Hong -  rainbow@cnnic.net.cn (ADNDRC Panelist)
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                        -->It's warm here.<--