Re: [wg-b] Preliminary Questions

[Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>]

>> if the law to protect these marks already exists, what need is there for
>> icann to do anything other than it already plans, which is to have the
>> dispute resolution process be based upon law?
> I don't necessarily disagree with you if the UDRP (which, let's remember is
> not yet a done deal), in combination with the other stuff (verifiable
> contact info, prepayment and searchable database) is in place.  My problems
> with the exclusion is that it seems to provide little marginal improvement
> over a decently-run UDRP.

so, i propose we say say no to this stuff and concentrate on seeing that the
dispute resolution process and policies are top quality, fair, and as easy
as possible within the fairness and quality constraints.

randy