Re: [ga] [fwd] UDRP issues report -- ALAC position? (from: roessler@does-not-exist.org)

[Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, Thomas Roessler wrote:

> if you have any input on this, that would be most welcome -- either
> to the GA, to me personally, or to the ALAC's official input
> address, forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The public was not allowed to participate in the rigged and railroaded
process that established the highly biased UDRP and its systematically
biased judicial system.

I would suggest that the position of the ALAC regarding both the UDRP
itself and its system of application be that they are the results of a
exclusionary process and are therefore completely invalid.

I would further suggest that the ALAC take the position that any new UDRP
processes start anew, not even taking into account the existance of the
existing UDRP or its system of application, and proceed only with the full
participation of the public with a voice commensurate with their numbers,
i.e. a veto power.

		--karl--