ICANN needs to put a contract in place with UDRP providers before it does anything else

["Jim Davies" <Jim.Davies@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Ms Eisner

 

I was very surprised to learn that there is no contract between ICANN
and the accredited UDRP providers.  Given the importance of the UDRP to
all domain registrants, who are contractually bound  to accept its terms
when they register a domain, there really must be a contract put in
place with the accredited providers as a matter of the utmost urgency.
Without it, it is not clear what control (if any) ICANN can apply on the
accredited providers to ensure that (as a minimum) they comply with the
UDRP Policy and Rules.

 

Whilst ICANN goes through due process in preparing a draft contract and
reaching consensus within the community on its content, it should make
clear to the providers that there can be no further amendment to their
Supplemental Rules.  I would also suggest that any contract needs to
provide for a review of the providers' existing Supplementary Rules; and
also an independent audit of the processes already followed by providers
when handling UDRP cases.

 

I think that if ICANN follows any other path, it will be badly failing
the millions of registrants who are bound to the UDRP as part of their
registration agreement.  The UDRP is an important process that impacts
on many parties, with over 30,000 decided cases already.  To maintain
the UDRP's legitimacy, the relationship with the accredited providers
must be put on a proper contractual footing and it must be brought under
the control of ICANN.

 

With best wishes

 

Jim Davies

 

 

The above are my personal views and not necessarily those of any
employer or client.

 

 

From: Samantha Eisner [mailto:Samantha.Eisner@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, 9 December 2009 4:01 AM
To: Jim Davies
Subject: Re: More information on CAC Proposed Amendments to the UDRP
Supplemental Rules of the Czech Arbitration Court public comment period

 

Dear Mr. Davies, 

ICANN does not currently enter into contracts with the Approved UDRP
Providers, therefore no contract exists that is responsive to your
inquiry.

Best regards, 

Samantha Eisner
--
Samantha Eisner
Senior Counsel
ICANN
4676 Admiralty Way #330
Marina del Rey, California  90292
Direct Dial: +1 310 578 8631
Office Fax: +1 310 823 8649 




On 12/6/09 8:19 PM, "Jim Davies" <Jim.Davies@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear Ms Eisner
 
With the consultation closing shortly, I would be grateful for a prompt
response to the request below. In case that you are away from the
office, I have copied this email for the attention of Rod Beckstrom as
well.
 
With best wishes
 
Jim Davies
 

From: Jim Davies 
Sent: Tuesday, 1 December 2009 11:12 AM
To: samantha.eisner@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: More information on CAC Proposed Amendments to the UDRP
Supplemental Rules of the Czech Arbitration Court public comment period

Dear Ms Eisner
 
As indicated on the ICANN website, I am emailing you to request more
information on the CAC Proposed UDRP amendments.  As indicated in my
submission on the subject, I would be most grateful if you could please
send me a copy of the contract entered into by UDRP providers when they
are accredited by ICANN.
 
With best wishes
 
Jim Davies
 

 
The above are my personal views and not necessarily those of any
employer or client.