ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

UDRP/URS decisions and the Courts

  • To: "comments-igo-ingo-crp-access-initial-20jan17@xxxxxxxxx" <comments-igo-ingo-crp-access-initial-20jan17@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: UDRP/URS decisions and the Courts
  • From: Mike Anderson <moonbar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 14:32:33 +0000


It's shallow, close-minded, insanely unfair, and even obnoxious to even begin 
considering to not allow the courts to determine cases when complainants or 
respondents feel they have been treated unfairly by a UDRP or URS decision.

Governments which employ democracy have checks and balances.  The same should 
be true for the UDPP and the URS.  To do otherwise creates an authoritarian 
regime within ICANN and the arbitration services like NAF and WIPO.  Who's to 
keep them in check if they get out of line?  There is absolutely no mechanism 
or no person the victim can go to.  How's this an improvement for the world?  
It's not, it's taking a step backwards into a hole of tyranny.

Freedom on the Internet both demands and requires that when assets and their 
owners or rightful owners are under persecution that they have all available 
legal means to defend themselves in front of an impartial court room, not some 
questionable, potentially dirty arbitration panel like the NAF which was shut 
out of the credit card business because of unscrupulous and dirty business 
practices by the Atty. Gen. of Minnesota, if I recall correctly.

Also, how can anyone expect to be treated 100% fairly by the NAF or WIPO when 
there are so many conflicting decisions, bad decisions, biased decisions, 
ignorant of the UDRP and URS rules decisions, etc....  There has to be 
recourse.  After all, everyone knows the UDRP and the URS is basically a sham 
that can and is abused regularly.  Why would any rational person that knows 
these two systems even began to consider giving them the ultimate 
decision-making authority?  It's makes me think that corruption is rife in the 
higher-ups simply because this is being considered.   It's anti-freedom at its 

In a normal courtroom setting you are allowed to appeal to a higher court.  
Here, what you are suggesting, is no court and no appeals mechanism -- even 
within the UDRP or URS -- let alone the courts.

If you remove the court option you are removing freedom and justice from the 
hands of the people you are supposed to serve.  You might as well let China 
make the rules for all mankind, it's about the same thing.   Shame on you for 
even considering this draconian measure.


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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy