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

["Joanna Lane" <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

Marilyn Cade wrote:-
And there is an appeals process with the
|>UDRP. The loser can always take the issue to their national court, or the
court of
|>jurisdiction.
|>
|>Why isn't that a reasonable approach?

Darryla (Dassa) Lynch wrote:-
The UDRP doesn't have an appeals process.  Taking a disputed resolution into
the jurisdiction of a court is taking it outside of the UDRP process.  Any
resolution process should have a method of appeal to not do so makes such
systems liable to complaints such as we see now in the UDRP.  The appeal
process would allow for more consistent resolutions.

- My concern is that if an appeals process is set up within ICANN, that will
undermine the very good relationship UDRP seeks to have directly with the
courts; a relationship in which UDRP is, in effect,  a mediation service
subject to higher authority of courts in all jurisdictions.

I think that's exactly the role ICANN should be taking on, to allow
representation for the interests of those with whom they are in contract who
have responsibility for administering the results of UDRP decisions.

If you introduce another layer, who would that be who could not be part of
UDRP?
I thought the idea was to fix UDRP, not circumvent the problem.

Joanna

--
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