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

[Marc Schneiders <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, at 15:59 [=GMT-0700], Karl Auerbach wrote:
> 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

> 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.

Perhaps you are asking too much. I would already be happy if a UDRP review
would actually materialize some 3 years after it was promised us.

I would like ALAC to take the position that no new names can be protected
until a proper review of the present UDRP has been completed. So no
WIPO-II until the review has been done.

The UDRP was a sort of testbed. Doesn't one first evaluate a testbed
before enlarging it?