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

["J. Scott Evans" <jse@adamspat.com>]

Michael:

I am afraid I may have offended you and that was not my intention.  I simply
think it would be useful to have a new set of eyes on your paper for
preparing the summary.  I have stated on the calls that I want the summaries
to be objective, just the facts.  That request went to everyone, not just
you.

I do not agree that the surveys are a waste of time.  That being said, I
would never want you to work on part of the project if that is how you feel.
Accordingly, if you would like to work on summarizing one of the other 11
papers, we'd be more than happy for your kind assistance.

Again, no ill-will or insult meant by my earlier message and I apologize if
I have offended you.

I look forward to hearing which paper you'd like to assist in summarizing.

Regards.

J. Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
To: "J. Scott Evans" <jse@adamspat.com>
Cc: "M. Scott Donahey" <sdonahey@tzllp.com>; <nc-udrp@dnso.org>;
<CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com>; <sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com>;
<ndundas@africaip.com>; <harris@cabase.org.ar>; <michael@palage.com>;
<philip.sheppard@aim.be>; <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>;
<DNSO.SECRETARIAT@dnso.org>
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Materials -URGENT PLEASE REPLY UPON RECEIPT


>
>
> Thank you for the comment on my objectivity.  I thought the point of the
> summaries was to list the suggestions, in which case I really cannot see
> the point of your complaint. If the point of the summaries is to
> editorialize on them, then I object to the procedure.
>
> I think the survey is a waste of time, and the summaries of it doubly so.
> If I'm going to summarize anything, I'll take a paper - but I won't
> editorialize on it in the "summary".
>
>
> On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, J. Scott Evans wrote:
>
> > Michael:
> >
> > My hope is to receive an objective summary of the paper.  I appreciate
your
> > willingness to assist; however, I would prefer that you help out with
> > another paper or, in the alternative, help with the remaining survey
> > results.  There will be plenty of time during our dialogue for you to
> > advocate the position(s) set forth in your paper.
> >
> > Thanks for your continued participation and I hope you feel better soon.
> >
> > J. Scott
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law"
<froomkin@law.miami.edu>
> > To: "M. Scott Donahey" <sdonahey@tzllp.com>
> > Cc: <jse@adamspat.com>; <nc-udrp@dnso.org>;
<CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com>;
> > <sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com>; <ndundas@africaip.com>;
> > <harris@cabase.org.ar>; <michael@palage.com>; <philip.sheppard@aim.be>;
> > <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>; <DNSO.SECRETARIAT@dnso.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 8:28 AM
> > Subject: Re: [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Materials -URGENT PLEASE REPLY UPON
RECEIPT
> >
> >
> > >
> > > 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.<--
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> 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.<--
>
>