[bc-gnso] FW: WIPO Selected as Exclusive Provider of Dispute Services For Objections To New TLDs At ICANN

[Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

FYI-WIPO has been appointed as the sole provider for adjudicating objections to 
new gTLDs (at the top level) by ICANN.

An article on the matter and the relevant page from the WIPO website are below.

http://www.ip-watch.org/?p=19503&utm_source=post&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alerts
WIPO Offers Dispute Services For Objections To New TLDs At ICANN
By William New, Intellectual Property Watch on 13/02/2012 @ 2:00 pm
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has embarked on 
a programme of allowing new generic top-level domains on the internet (like 
.com), an initiative that has worried trademark holders and international 
organisations. Now the World Intellectual Property Organization Arbitration and 
Mediation Center is offering services for trademark holders who wish to 
challenge proposals for new gTLDs later this year.
WIPO "has been appointed by ICANN as the exclusive provider of dispute 
resolution services for trademark based 'pre-delegation' Legal Rights 
Objections under ICANN's New gTLD Program," it says in its webpage on the 
services<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/> [1].
This mechanism forms part of the Trademark Rights Protection Mechanisms for New 
gTLDs<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/rpm/> [2], accompanying the ICANN 
initiative.
Applications for new gTLDs are due at ICANN by 12 April, and will be made 
public soon after by ICANN, which will announce the objection filing period, 
expected to about seven months, according to WIPO.
Related Articles:

  *   EU's Kroes Not Amused By ICANN Decision On New 
TLDs<http://www.ip-watch.org/2011/06/22/eus-kroes-not-amused-by-icann-decision-on-tlds/>
 [3]
  *   WIPO Goes To Bat For Trademark Owners At 
ICANN<http://www.ip-watch.org/2011/05/16/wipo-goes-to-bat-for-trademark-owners-at-icann/>
 [4]
  *   WIPO Takes A Shot At ICANN's Domain Dispute 
Reform<http://www.ip-watch.org/2011/07/19/wipo-takes-a-shot-at-icanns-domain-dispute-reform/>
 [5]
Categories: Enforcement,English,Information and Communications Technology/ 
Broadcasting,IP Live,IP Policies,Language,Themes,Trademarks/Geographical 
Indications/Domains,Venues,WIPO
________________________________
Article printed from Intellectual Property Watch: http://www.ip-watch.org
URL to article: 
http://www.ip-watch.org/2012/02/13/wipo-offers-dispute-services-for-objections-to-new-tlds-at-icann/
URLs in this post:
[1] webpage on the services: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/
[2] Trademark Rights Protection Mechanisms for New gTLDs: 
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/rpm/
[3] EU's Kroes Not Amused By ICANN Decision On New TLDs: 
http://www.ip-watch.org/2011/06/22/eus-kroes-not-amused-by-icann-decision-on-tlds/
[4] WIPO Goes To Bat For Trademark Owners At ICANN: 
http://www.ip-watch.org/2011/05/16/wipo-goes-to-bat-for-trademark-owners-at-icann/
[5] WIPO Takes A Shot At ICANN's Domain Dispute Reform: 
http://www.ip-watch.org/2011/07/19/wipo-takes-a-shot-at-icanns-domain-dispute-reform/

http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/
Legal Rights Objections under ICANN's New gTLD Program
Legal Rights Objections Toolkit
*         ICANN Applicant Guidebook, Module 3, Objection Procedures 
<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/objection-procedures-clean-19sep11-en.pdf>
*         ICANN New gTLD Dispute Resolution 
Procedure<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/new-gtld-drp-clean-19sep11-en.pdf>
*         WIPO Rules for New gTLD Dispute 
Resolution<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/wipo-rules-clean-19sep11-en.pdf>
*         WIPO Schedule of Fees for New gTLD Dispute 
Resolution<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/wipo-fees-clean-19sep11-en.pdf>
*         Legal Rights Objection FAQs<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/>
*         Legal Rights Objection Filing Guidelines
*         [coming soon: model pleadings]
Filing a Legal Rights Objection at WIPO: What You Need To Know
The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center has been appointed by ICANN as the 
exclusive provider
of dispute resolution services for trademark based "pre-delegation" Legal 
Rights Objections
under ICANN's New gTLD Program. This mechanism forms part of the available
Trademark Rights Protection Mechanisms for New 
gTLDs<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/rpm/>.
Below are responses to some frequently asked questions about Legal Rights 
Objections; these
responses summarize information found in the authoritative ICANN Applicant 
Guidebook<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/objection-procedures-clean-19sep11-en.pdf>.
 ICANN also
separately provides an Objection and Dispute Resolution Fact 
Sheet<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/objection-dispute-resolution-fact-sheet-14dec11-en.pdf>.
*         What is a Legal Rights Objection? 
<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#1a>
*         Does ICANN offer other types of objection 
options?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#2a>
*         What criteria will a panel use to determine the outcome of a Legal 
Rights Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#3a>
*         When can a Legal Rights Objection be 
filed?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#4a>
*         How does a rights owner submit a Legal Rights 
Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#5a>
*         Is it necessary for an applicant to file a response to a Legal Rights 
Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#6a>
*         What are the main stages of a Legal Rights 
Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#7a>
*         How many rounds of pleadings are 
involved?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#8a>
*         Are there hearings?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#9a>
*         Can the parties mediate/settle their 
dispute?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#10a>
*         How much does it cost to file/defend a Legal Rights 
Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#11a>
*         Are there language requirements? 
<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#12a>
*         Are there word/page 
limits?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#13a>
*         Who are the experts available for 
appointment?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#14a>
*         How is the expert panel 
appointed?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#15a>
*         What are the remedies 
available?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#16a>
*         What happens if there is more than one objection to an applied-for 
New gTLD?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#17a>
*         Is the panel's determination made publicly 
available?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#18a>
*         Do parties retain their court 
options?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#19a>
*         What is the WIPO Center's role in Legal Rights 
Objections?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#20a>
*         Background on WIPO's involvement in Legal Rights 
Objections<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#21a>
*         What trademark protection mechanisms are available after new gTLDs 
are approved?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#22a>
*         Additional information on WIPO's involvement in the Domain Name 
System<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#23a>
*         Questions?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#24a>
What is a Legal Rights Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
Prior to ICANN's approval of a New gTLD, third parties may file a formal 
objection to an application on several grounds, including, for trademark owners 
and Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs), on the basis of a "Legal Rights 
Objection."
When such an objection is filed, an independent panel (comprised of one or 
three external, neutral experts) will determine whether the applicant's 
potential use of the applied-for gTLD would be likely to infringe (described 
below) the objector's existing trademark, or IGO name or acronym.
Does ICANN offer other types of objection 
options?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
To address potential disputes over new gTLD applications, ICANN offers three 
other types of pre-delegation objection-based dispute resolution procedures 
which are not administered by WIPO, namely, "String Confusion Objection," 
"Limited Public Interest Objection," and "Community Objection." For the latter 
two types of objections, ICANN is also making available an "Independent 
Objector" by way of public service. ICANN has furthermore established a process 
for the ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) to provide "GAC Advice on 
New gTLDs" concerning applications identified by governments as problematic. 
For more detailed information on all ICANN objection options, see Module 
3<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/objection-procedures-11jan12-en.pdf>
 of the ICANN Applicant Guidebook.
What criteria will a panel use to determine the outcome of a Legal Rights 
Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
As provided for in section 3.5.2 of the ICANN Applicant Guidebook, the 
independent panel will determine whether the potential use of the applied-for 
gTLD by the applicant:
(i) takes unfair advantage of the distinctive character or the reputation of 
the objector's registered or unregistered trademark or service mark ("mark") or 
IGO name or acronym, or
(ii) unjustifiably impairs the distinctive character or the reputation of the 
objector's mark or IGO name or acronym, or
(iii) otherwise creates an impermissible likelihood of confusion between the 
applied-for gTLD and the objector's mark or IGO name or acronym.
The panel will ordinarily determine the merits of the objection based solely on 
the parties' pleadings, and may make reference to a range of non-exclusive 
consideration factors listed below.
For an objection based on trademark rights, the panel will consider the 
following non exclusive consideration factors:
1. Whether the applied-for gTLD is identical or similar, including in 
appearance, phonetic sound, or meaning, to the objector's existing mark.
2. Whether the objector's acquisition and use of rights in the mark has been 
bona fide.
3. Whether and to what extent there is recognition in the relevant sector of 
the public of the sign corresponding to the gTLD, as the mark of the objector, 
of the applicant or of a third party.
4. Applicant's intent in applying for the gTLD, including whether the 
applicant, at the time of application for the gTLD, had knowledge of the 
objector's mark, or could not have reasonably been unaware of that mark, and 
including whether the applicant has engaged in a pattern of conduct whereby it 
applied for or operates TLDs or registrations in TLDs which are identical or 
confusingly similar to the marks of others.
5. Whether and to what extent the applicant has used, or has made demonstrable 
preparations to use, the sign corresponding to the gTLD in connection with a 
bona fide offering of goods or services or a bona fide provision of information 
in a way that does not interfere with the legitimate exercise by the objector 
of its mark rights.
6. Whether the applicant has marks or other intellectual property rights in the 
sign corresponding to the gTLD, and, if so, whether any acquisition of such a 
right in the sign, and use of the sign, has been bona fide, and whether the 
purported or likely use of the gTLD by the applicant is consistent with such 
acquisition or use.
7. Whether and to what extent the applicant has been commonly known by the sign 
corresponding to the gTLD, and if so, whether any purported or likely use of 
the gTLD by the applicant is consistent therewith and bona fide.
8. Whether the applicant's intended use of the gTLD would create a likelihood 
of confusion with the objector's mark as to the source, sponsorship, 
affiliation, or endorsement of the gTLD.
For an objection based on rights in the name or acronym of an IGO, the panel 
will consider the following non-exclusive consideration factors:
1. Whether the applied-for gTLD is identical or similar, including in 
appearance, phonetic sound or meaning, to the name or acronym of the objecting 
IGO.
2. Historical coexistence of the IGO and the applicant's use of a similar name 
or acronym. Factors considered may include: a. Level of global recognition of 
both entities; b. Length of time the entities have been in existence; c. Public 
historical evidence of their existence, which may include whether the objecting 
IGO has communicated its name or abbreviation under Article 6ter of the Paris 
Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property.
3. Whether and to what extent the applicant has used, or has made demonstrable 
preparations to use, the sign corresponding to the TLD in connection with a 
bona fide offering of goods or services or a bona fide provision of information 
in a way that does not interfere with the legitimate exercise of the objecting 
IGO's name or acronym.
4. Whether and to what extent the applicant has been commonly known by the sign 
corresponding to the applied-for gTLD, and if so, whether any purported or 
likely use of the gTLD by the applicant is consistent therewith and bona fide.
5. Whether the applicant's intended use of the applied-for gTLD would create a 
likelihood of confusion with the objecting IGO's name or acronym as to the 
source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the TLD.
When can a Legal Rights Objection be 
filed?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
After closing the application window (from January 12 to April 12, 2012) and 
posting all applications, ICANN will announce the opening of the objection 
filing window. Currently, the objection filing window is anticipated to be 
seven months, from approximately May 1 to December 1, 2012. (More or less in 
parallel with the latter filing window, ICANN will be undertaking a so-called 
Initial Evaluation of applications for compliance with ICANN Applicant 
Guidebook formalities.)
How does a rights owner submit a Legal Rights 
Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
All Legal Rights Objections must be submitted electronically to the WIPO Center 
by email to lro@xxxxxxxx<mailto:lro@xxxxxxxx> using the WIPO Center's model 
form [coming soon] with a copy of the objection to ICANN and the applicant. The 
objection filing fee must be submitted at the time of filing.
An objection must contain at least the following: (i) the names and full 
contact information of the objector; (ii) a statement of the objector's basis 
for standing under the procedure; and (iii) a confirmation of the basis for the 
objection (i.e., "Legal Rights Objection") including "an explanation of the 
validity of the objection and why the objection should be upheld."
Is it necessary for an applicant to file a response to a Legal Rights 
Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
Responses must be submitted electronically to the WIPO Center by email to 
lro@xxxxxxxx<mailto:lro@xxxxxxxx> using the WIPO Center's model form [coming 
soon] with a copy to ICANN and the objector. The response filing fee must be 
submitted at the time of filing of the response.
A response must contain at least the following: (i) the names and full contact 
information of the applicant; and (ii) a "point-by-point response to the 
statements made in the objection." An applicant's failure to reply to an 
objection would be considered a "default" and would result in the objection 
being deemed successful.
What are the main stages of a Legal Rights 
Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
On receipt of an objection or response, the WIPO Center will conduct an 
administrative compliance review and process the case filing fee. Any 
administrative deficiencies must be corrected within five (5) days of 
notification by the Center. Within 30 days of the close of the objection 
window, ICANN will publish a "Dispute Announcement" listing all 
administratively compliant objections. The WIPO Center will then notify 
applicants of any objections; applicants will then have 30 days to file a 
response. Within 30 days of receiving a response, the WIPO Center will appoint 
the expert panel. Normally the panel will render its determination within 45 
days of appointment.
A graphic overview is provided by the respective "Objection and Dispute 
Resolution<http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icannobjectionflowchart.pdf>"
 and "Evaluation 
Process<http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icannevaluationprocess.pdf>"
 flow charts found in the ICANN Applicant Guidebook.
How many rounds of pleadings are 
involved?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
While the panel has discretion to order or admit additional written statements, 
the ICANN dispute resolution procedure typically contemplates a single round of 
pleadings.
Are there hearings?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
Only in exceptional cases may a panel hold a hearing (by videoconference if 
possible).
Can the parties mediate/settle their 
dispute?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
In the event the parties wish to participate in mediation/settlement 
negotiations, at any point during the proceedings, they may jointly request a 
30-day suspension. The WIPO Center can assist the parties in finding an 
appropriately qualified mediator to help the parties in seeking to reach a 
mutually satisfactory settlement of their dispute, under the WIPO Mediation 
Rules<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/mediation/rules/>. In such event, the WIPO 
Center will not charge any additional fee for its mediation case administration 
services.
How much does it cost to file/defend a Legal Rights 
Objection?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
For a case involving an objection to one application (i.e., for one gTLD) to be 
decided by one expert, the fee will be USD 10,000 for each party (this includes 
a non-refundable USD 2,000 case administration fee), subject to a refund of the 
expert fee (USD 8,000) to the prevailing party. Different fee arrangements 
apply to three-member panels and to possible consolidation scenarios; full 
details are provided in the WIPO Schedule of Fees for New gTLD Dispute 
Resolution<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/wipo-fees-clean-19sep11-en.pdf>.
Non-payment of fees by an objector will result in rejection of the objection, 
without panel appointment. Non payment of response fees by an applicant will 
result in the objection being deemed successful.
Are there language requirements?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
In all cases, the language of proceedings is English. According to the ICANN 
Applicant Guidebook, "Parties may submit supporting evidence in its original 
language, provided and subject to the authority of the Panel to determine 
otherwise, that such evidence is accompanied by a certified or otherwise 
official English translation of all relevant text."
Are there word/page limits?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
The substantive portion of an objection or response is limited to 5,000 words 
or 20 pages, whichever is less, excluding attachments. The objector or 
applicant must also list, describe and provide copies of any attached 
supporting evidence.
Who are the experts available for 
appointment?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
The WIPO Center will be posting a list of experts available for appointment 
prior to the start of the objection filing period. This list will take into 
account requirements of professional expertise and may be subject to additional 
development by the WIPO Center in light of case needs. As part of the process 
of appointment to an actual case, experts are required to affirm their 
neutrality by signing the WIPO Center's Statement of Acceptance and Declaration 
of Impartiality and Independence [coming soon].
How is the expert panel appointed?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
Unless the parties agree on a three-member expert panel, for a single-member 
expert panel the WIPO Center will appoint the expert in its sole discretion. 
Where the parties agree on a three member expert panel, each party may submit a 
list of three candidates from the WIPO Center's list of experts, one of whom 
would be appointed as the respective party-elected expert co-panelist; the WIPO 
Center will then provide the parties with a list of five candidates from the 
WIPO Center's list of experts for the parties' respective ranking, with a view 
to the WIPO Center's appointment of the third (presiding) expert panelist.
What are the remedies available?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
The remedies are limited to the success or dismissal of the objection. There 
are no monetary damages, but the prevailing party is entitled to a partial 
refund of the panel fee (as described above). According to the ICANN Applicant 
Guidebook, a panel determination is "considered an expert determination and 
advice that ICANN will accept within the dispute resolution process." Such 
determination is independent of any determination under either of the other 
types of ICANN objection options available.
What happens if there is more than one objection to an applied-for New 
gTLD?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
In certain scenarios, such as where multiple objections are filed against the 
same application, to streamline costs and for procedural efficiency, the WIPO 
Center will endeavor where appropriate to consolidate such objections for 
determination by a single panel; in such consolidated cases, a separate 
determination would be rendered for each objection. Within seven days of the 
WIPO Center's notification of the commencement of the response filing period to 
the applicant, the parties themselves may also propose, for the WIPO Center's 
determination, in its discretion, that objections be consolidated. The WIPO 
Center may take into account factors such as whether the same or similar 
application is at issue; any request/opposition of the parties; the 
trademarks/evidence relied-upon; or expert availability.
Is the panel's determination made publicly 
available?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
Unless in exceptional circumstances the panel deems it appropriate to redact 
portions of its determination, the WIPO Center will post each determination in 
full on its website.
Also, upon registering an objection for processing, the WIPO Center will post 
on its website the following information about the objection: the proposed 
string to which the objection is directed; the names of the objector and 
applicant; the grounds for objection (i.e., "Legal Rights Objection"); and the 
date of the WIPO Center's receipt of the objection.
Do parties retain their court 
options?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
The availability of the Legal Rights Objection as an administrative dispute 
resolution option does not preclude court options which either party may have 
to submit the dispute to court.
What is the WIPO Center's role in Legal Rights 
Objections?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
The WIPO Center's role is limited to case administration, including verifying 
that the objection and response satisfy the relevant filing requirements, 
issuing case related notifications, appointment of the panel of experts, 
coordinating communications between the parties and panel, and otherwise 
facilitating efficient case resolution. The WIPO Center is independent and 
impartial in this case administration role; the merits of an objection are 
determined by the appointed expert.
Background on WIPO's involvement in Legal Rights 
Objections<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
In December 2007, ICANN sought "Expressions of Interest from Potential Dispute 
Resolution Service Providers for [its] New gTLD Program." In January 2008, the 
WIPO Center signaled its readiness to assist ICANN in devising and applying 
appropriate trademark-based dispute resolution procedures for New gTLDs. From 
that time, using the WIPO "Joint Recommendation Concerning Provisions on the 
Protection of Marks, and Other Industrial Property Rights in Signs, on the 
Internet<http://www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/development_iplaw/pdf/pub845.pdf>" as 
a foundation, the WIPO Center has collaborated with ICANN on the development of 
substantive criteria and procedural rules for pre-(TLD) delegation dispute 
resolution for trademark-based Legal Rights Objections as set out in module 
3.5.2 of the ICANN Applicant 
Guidebook<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/objection-procedures-clean-19sep11-en.pdf>.
 The WIPO Center subsequently accepted to administer disputes under the ICANN 
Legal Rights Objection 
Procedure<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/new-gtld-drp-clean-19sep11-en.pdf>;
 the ICANN Applicant Guidebook includes the resulting WIPO Rules for New gTLD 
Dispute 
Resolution<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/wipo-rules-clean-19sep11-en.pdf>
 including a Schedule of Fees and 
Costs<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/wipo-fees-clean-19sep11-en.pdf>.
What trademark protection mechanisms are available after new gTLDs are 
approved?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
Beyond the above-described pre-delegation objection procedures (available prior 
to any new gTLD being approved and becoming operational), ICANN has established 
a range of "Rights Protection Mechanisms" (RPMs). These include a Trademark 
Clearinghouse (for use in connection with Sunrise periods and Trademark Claims 
services), a Uniform Rapid Suspension system (URS), and a Post-Delegation 
Dispute Resolution Procedure (PDDRP). In addition, the existing Uniform Domain 
Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP<http://www.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp.htm>) 
will be applicable to all new gTLDs. More information on these RPMs can be 
found in the WIPO Center's overview of Trademark Rights Protection Mechanisms 
for New gTLDs<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/>.
Additional information on WIPO's involvement in the Domain Name 
System<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
WIPO has been engaging with Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) for the Domain 
Name System (DNS) since it conducted the First WIPO Internet Domain Name 
Process<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/processes/process1/> in 1998 and 1999, which 
provided the blueprint for ICANN's adoption of the UDRP. With a globally unique 
range of jurisprudential 
resources<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/resources/>, the WIPO Arbitration 
and Mediation Center is the leading provider of UDRP case administration 
services; through 2011, it has processed over 22,000 such cases. The Center 
furthermore has engaged in a range of further activities such as 
Sunrises<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/reports/>, ccTLD policy advice and 
case administration<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/cctld/>, and policy 
input for New gTLDs<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/newgtld/>.
*         WIPO Observations on New gTLD Dispute Resolution 
Mechanisms<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/newgtld/>
*         Selected WIPO correspondence with 
ICANN<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/resources/icann/>
*         Domain Name Disputes (including 
UDRP)<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/>
Questions?<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/#top>
For more information about the Legal Rights Objection procedure, please direct 
any inquiries by email to lro@xxxxxxxx<mailto:lro@xxxxxxxx>, or by telephone to 
+41 22 338 8247 or (toll free) 0800 888 549. More detailed information can be 
found in the ICANN Applicant 
Guidebook<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb>.
Contact
Arbitration and Mediation Center
Geneva

Arbitration and Mediation Center
Singapore

34, chemin des Colombettes
P.O. Box 18
1211 Geneva 20
Switzerland
T +4122 338 8247 or 0800 888 549
F +4122 740 3700 or 0800 888 550

Maxwell Chambers
32 Maxwell Road #02-02
Singapore 069115

T +65 6225 2129
F +65 6225 3568



Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

________________________________

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
Version: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2112/4807 - Release Date: 02/13/12