Re: [ga] WIPO proposal for Paperless UDRP

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

George and all,

  I proposed this back in 2000.  It was rejected for reasons
of it's exposier to fraud.

George Kirikos wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> I'd like to bring to your attention a letter sent to ICANN by WIPO
> proposing Paperless UDRP:
>
> http://www.icann.org/correspondence/wilbers-to-jeffrey-08oct08.pdf
>
> Basically, the proposal involves submissions being made in electronic
> form, and that instead of delivery of the actual complaint, that NOTICE
> of the complaint be delivered instead. This would save considerable
> amounts of paper, reduce courier charges (as the notice weighs far less
> than the full complaint), and thus would be good for the environment.
>
> Generally, I'm in favour of the motivation behind the proposal, as it
> would reduce a great amount of waste, and increase efficiency. It might
> need to be tweaked a little, though, in order to improve safeguards for
> registrants.
>
> My concern is that whatever form of notice takes place, the goal should
> be that registrants have ACTUAL notice of the complaint, and sufficient
> time to prepare a defence. It's very easy to miss an email, given 90%+
> of all emails are spam.There are already international
> treaties like the Hague Service Convention:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Service_Convention
>
> on this topic, so one need not reinvent the wheel completely. One
> possible way to assist in ensuring actual notice is to optionally
> permit registrants to store at their registrar (and optionally display
> in WHOIS) the name and contact information of their legal counsel, who
> would then also receive copies of the UDRP notice. The more people "in
> the loop" so to speak, the greater the odds of actual notice. This is
> also a way for legitimate and responsible organizations owning domain
> names to signal and whitelist themselves, separating themselves from
> fly-by-night operations who would never list a legal counsel and who
> would typically never respond to a UDRP.
>
> In Ontario, Canada, the Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule 18.01):
>
> http://www.canlii.org/on/laws/regu/1990r.194/20080821/whole.html
>
> give a defendant up to 60 days to respond to a complaint, compared with
> the 20 days in UDRP. I believe this to be typical. If the UDRP allowed
> the time to reply to vary depending on the age of the domain name (i.e.
> difference between the current date and the creation date),
> that might be a suitable compromise. A registrant of a domain that is
> 10 years old would be able to take a 3 week vacation without worrying
> that someone might have filed a UDRP during that time. Whereas a
> freshly cybersquatted domain name that is less than 1 year old would be
> subject to a shorter time to respond. This also provides incentive for
> complainants to file UDRPs in a timely manner, rather than waiting
> years to do so. If a domain name is 5 or 10 years old, there is not the
> same sense of urgency as a freshly registered domain name.
>
> As we move towards an electronic system, though should also be given to
> ensuring that submissions are in easy-to-use formats, e.g. PDF (not MS
> Word). Even better would be to have a markup-language like XML (perhaps
> call it UDRPML?) similar to the electronic submissions in the EDGAR
> system
>
> http://sec.gov/edgar/aboutedgar.htm
>
> where documents are filed in XBRL, FPML for derivatives transactions
>
> http://www.fpml.org/
>
> and so on. If UDRP decisions were similarly available in UDRPML, this
> would permit academics to perform studies like those of Professor Geist
>
> http://www.udrpinfo.com/
>
> more easily and at lower cost. Other legal scholars and service
> providers would also appreciate a standardized format to make analysis
> and redistribution/reformatting simpler.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> http://www.leap.com/

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln
"YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
My Phone: 214-244-4827