Re: [ga] What is ICANN doing to make sure that the UDRP providers are truly neutral?

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

George and all,

  Long before you were on the scene many of us complained bitterly
regarding Ester Dysons suggestion and eventual implimentation of the
UDRP as a resolution mechnisim for cybersquatting disputes as we than
knew it such a method would grow in to the now ugly and disproportionately
unfair and unjust mechinisim it has become.  But thank you for your well
reasoned and frankly stated remarks in reminder.  Well done!  >:)

  The UDRP is an abominition and has grown into an even bigger
abomination. 

-----Original Message-----
>From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Oct 14, 2009 11:18 AM
>To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [ga] What is ICANN doing to make sure that the UDRP providers are 
>truly neutral?
>
>
>Hi folks,
>
>There was a very good article in the Wall Street Journal today discussing the 
>turmoil in the arbitration world, in particular with NAF:
>
>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125548128115183913.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
>
>"Banks "don't need the taint that comes with mandatory arbitration."
>
>"While telling consumers that it was an impartial arbitrator, NAF worked 
>closely with creditors, the regulator claimed, including drafting claims 
>against consumers."
>
>"Former arbitrators, a congressional subcommittee, consumers and government 
>suits are now alleging that NAF has been systematically ruling against 
>consumers for years."
>
>"A congressional subcommittee, which began an investigation last year to study 
>the fairness of mandatory arbitration, concluded in July that the current 
>arbitration system is "ripe for abuse." Arbitration, as "operated by NAF, does 
>not provide protection for those consumers," the committee said."
>
>"Before that case, she had ruled in favor of credit-card companies 18 
>consecutive times, she told the committee. She says she finished several 
>pending NAF cases after she ruled for the card holder, but then wasn't given 
>more cases. The official reason the NAF gave for canceling more work was 
>scheduling conflicts. But Ms. Bartholet said in an interview that an NAF 
>manager told her she was likely removed because she ruled for the debtor."
>
>In light of this, what is ICANN doing to ensure that UDRP is conducted in a 
>neutral manner? Ideally it should be optional, unless *both* parties agree to 
>it (i.e. parties should be permitted to choose the courts, a superior method 
>for complex matters, if they feel it is appropriate).
>
>We have had NAF openly admit (in their IRT comments) that:
>
>http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00178.html
>
>"Panelists have taken the opportunity, over time, to agree with those 
>complainants and broaden the scope of the UDRP, but it started out as a 
>mechanism only for clear cut cases of cybersquatting."
>
>It's clearly in the financial interests of UDRP providers (and panelists) to 
>continue to expand the scope of cases and tilt their decisions towards 
>complainants in order to encourage more complaints overall, and more 
>complaints that involve either themselves as panelists or their UDRP provider 
>("forum shopping"). This represents a perversion of the system of justice that 
>domain registrants rely upon.
>
>ICANN staff and the GSNO should prepare an issues report, and perhaps fund 
>independent scholarly research like that conducted by Professor Michael Geist 
>in the past:
>
>http://www.udrpinfo.com/
>
>Sincerely,
>
>George Kirikos
>http://www.leap.com/

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"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
Phone: 214-244-4827