ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-lockpdp-wg]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[gnso-lockpdp-wg] For your review and feedback - options to address settlement

  • To: "Gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <Gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-lockpdp-wg] For your review and feedback - options to address settlement
  • From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 04:35:43 -0700

Dear All,

As discussed during our last meeting, please find below the two options in
relation to settlement under consideration, as well as some of the notes
reflecting our discussion. Although option A received the most support in
response to the survey, following further discussion during the meeting, it
seems that there are some strong views in support of option B, while the
support for option A is perceived to be weaker. As a result, those on the
call appear to be leaning towards favouring option B (as modified below) for
inclusion in the Final Report. If there is disagreement with this approach,
you are encouraged to share your views with the mailing list ahead of the
next meeting.

Note, in reviewing preliminary recommendation #10, which is linked to this
issue, it looks like we may need to update the language to reflect that a
transfer can only be carried out once the UDRP has been dismissed, so
replacing 'the registrar must remove any lock preventing a transfer or
cancellation within 2 Business days of confirmation of the settlement by
both Parties' with 'the registrar must remove any lock preventing a transfer
or cancellation within 2 Business days of confirmation of the settlement by
both Parties and confirmation of the dismissal by the UDRP Provider (noting
that such confirmation of automatic dismissal may be included in the
original order issued by the Provider informing the Registrar of the
suspension). If my assumption is incorrect or you have other suggestions on
how to address this issue, please feel free to share your comments /
suggestions with the mailing list.

With best regards,

Marika

Settlement ­ Options under consideration
Option A: (1) parties ask for suspension, (2) parties settle, (3) parties
inform provider, (4) provider issues order to registrar to change the holder
details or delete the domain name, (5) that change or deletion happens, (6)
complainant confirms change or deletion is complete, and (7) provider
dismisses the case.
Note ­ UDRP Providers noted that no transfer is allowed until the case is
dismissed which, should this option be supported, would mean that step 7 may
need to be added to step 4.
Option B (as updated during the last meeting) ­ (1) parties ask for
suspension (suspension request includes automatic dismissal when the
suspension period is up), (2) provider issues order allowing registrar to
unlock for the sole purpose of (whatever the settlement is), (3) parties
settle), (4) parties request the registrar to implement the settlement
agreement - in case of a settlement in favor of the complainant, by moving
the domain name to the control of the complainant where it shall remain
locked pending the receipt of a dismissal from the provider when the domain
name will be unlocked, and (4) provider dismisses case automatically with no
further action needed (if settlement discussions break down, either party
can request that the case be reinstated before automatic dismissal).
Issues discussed during the last meeting:
·      Registrar does not have relationship with Complainant, but has
received a copy of the complaint that contains the relevant information

·      UDRP Provider does not have relationship with Respondent, but
information should have been verified by the registrar

·      If UDRP Provider is responsible for Œconfirming¹ settlement,
registrars need to be aware that this will not absolve them from any
responsibility under the UDRP

·      Transfer is not allowed until UDRP case is dismissed

·      Settlement can also include agreement that domain name registration
stays with respondent (i.e. does not always involve a transfer)

·      Provider is administrative body, does not have legal authority to
Œorder¹ transfer

·      If option A would become the new process (part of UDRP rules or in
the form of an advisory), wouldn¹t it become enforceable on registrars (via
ICANN Compliance)?
Note, this recommendation is linked to Preliminary Recommendation #10: In
the case of suspension of a proceeding (when the parties have agreed to a
settlement), the UDRP Provider informs the Registrar of the Suspension,
including the expected duration of the suspension. Should both parties come
to a settlement, which would involve a transfer, cancellation or agreement
that the registration will remain with the Respondent, the registrar must
remove any lock preventing a transfer or cancellation within 2 Business days
of confirmation of the settlement by both Parties.


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy