Re: FW: [wg-review] [DNDEF] short quizz 9,10

[Andy Gardner <andy@navigator.co.nz>]

At 2:58 pm -0800 2/8/01, Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 03:37:23PM -0600, Andy Gardner wrote:
>> At 1:13 pm -0800 2/8/01, Kent Crispin wrote:
>> >In any case, the question of whether we need a UDRP has already been
>> >settled -- we do.  The question is how to make it better.
>>
>> As in "what changes need to be made" or "how the hell do we get the damn
>> thing improved" ?
>
>The changes I think need to be considered are:
>
>1) competition among arbitration service providers must be arranged so
>that they tend to produce uniform results.  "Forum shopping" should be
>restricted to issues of price and service, not anticipated results.
>[But if the trend noted by Mueller continues, and the numver
>
>2) there needs to be a feedback mechanism that corrects for really bad
>decisions.
>
>I say "considered" because neither of these are trivial issues.

I've got the shakes.

Kent and I are in total agreement.

God only knows what will happen next, and he's not letting on.

-- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.domain-owners.org http://www.tldlobby.com
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html