Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) and Domain Theives

["24-7 Outdoors, Inc." <kellypitts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello ICANN,

     Allowing the Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) is a disaster waiting to 
happen.  If you are looking for an all-out war between trademark interests and 
domain owners then just pass this.  You think the UDRP is bad?  Wait until the 
hellstorm shows up at your door from absolutely furious domain owners suing you 
for lost income, damages to their businesses, negligence in application, 
etc......

If this passes you will be giving extreme powers to trademark holders, and 
letting domain owners suffer from ANY kind of trademark complaint from anywhere 
in the world.   Do you realize just how many URS applications will be 
filed......right or wrong?  It will be used more for taking down competitors, 
potentital competitors, and as a "land grab" by the filers of the URS.  If they 
are successful in taking down a domain it will make the domain owner weaker and 
more likey to sell also. It will become a famous technique to practice by 
lawyers and such. Basically it will be used more often to steal domains or harm 
other business once lawyers realize they can "game the system".

As an example, look at all the bogus cases brought against domain owners in 
UDRP, can you not see that this system will be abused much more than even the 
UDRP?  As it stands, the UDRP has become a favorite first attempt mechanism as 
at theft of many prime generic domains worth thousands or even millions of 
dollars.  For  about $5,000 a person can "roll the dice" to try to steal an 
asset worth $500,000 or more!  Where else can you find those odds in 
winning/stealing an asset?  You need to work on a solution that is BETTER than 
the UDRP, not worse !

In addition, there could be no worse move than to release many new domain 
extensions and the URS at roughly the same time.  You will destroy the Internet 
with bureaucracy.  Also, every domain owner will feel like they could be 
attacked at any moment.

I agree that trademark interests have a right to be concerned about the 
cybersquatting.  It is a problem, but it has been getting better, regardless of 
what some companies like MarkMonitor are saying about it growing.  MarkMonitor 
is biased IMO because they would be out of business if the cybersquatters 
disappeared.....so they must make it appear as though the problem is getting 
worse.   Many domain owners are dropping their trademark domains because they 
don't want a UDRP filing against them, or a court action.  

I do agree that we need a better solution to the UDRP.  It has been 
semi-effective in stopping cybersquatters, and fairly effective of stripping 
rightful domain owners of legitimate claims to their domains.....but neither 
has worked really well for either the Complainants or the Respondents. 

Simply put, the UDRP has become a tool for theft of domains.   ICANN, the NAF, 
and WIPO are painfully aware of this.  A group of domain owners have informally 
threatened a RICO lawsuit against them and ICANN. There appears to be collusion 
between many parties to serve the best interest of trademark holders 
specifically, and ignore rights of domain owners.  If you pass the URS you will 
create an even bigger burglar tool for stealing domains, or at least 
marginalizing them by taking them down, which is almost as good to the domain 
theives/domain attackers.

Passing the URS will be like dropping a nuclear bomb on the Net and the front 
door and email inbox to ICANN will be blown wide open by the sheer number of 
complaints about frivilous URS claims and decisions against domain owners.

You guys and gals really need to use your head on this one because you did not 
think through the consequences.  Hopefully you will take all the comments 
seriously this time unlike the past where everyone has felt like ICANN ignored 
them.

Thanks for your time reading this.

Regards,

Kelly Pitts