<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
I retransmitted the BC comment with a pasted version as well as a new copy of the document. It was saved on my mac, and while I could open it, Steve noted a problem with it. It has been received by ICANN in readable form. <div><br></div><div>Marilyn Cade<br><br><div><div id="SkyDrivePlaceholder"></div><hr id="stopSpelling">From: marilynscade@hotmail.com<br>To: steve.crocker@icann.org; fadi.chehade@icann.org; john.jeffrey@icann.org<br>CC: excomm@bizconst.org<br>Subject: RE: Communication from Business Constituency regarding position of Constituency on approval of UDRP providers<br>Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 02:37:29 -0500<br><br>
<style><!--
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr">
It appears that the document may not have properly transmitted. It is pasted below, and is of course, posted back in Oct 2010 in the public comment process.<div><br></div><div>Marilyn</div><div><br></div><div>Pasted copy of 2010 submission:</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><span style="font-size:19.0pt;font-family:Times">Business Constituency comment on recognizing new
UDRP providers</span></b></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.5in;tab-stops:11.0pt .5in;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times"><span style="">•<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times">To</span></i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times">:
"acdr-proposal@xxxxxxxxx" <acdr-proposal@xxxxxxxxx></span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.5in;tab-stops:11.0pt .5in;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times"><span style="">•<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times">Subject</span></i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times">: Business Constituency
comment on recognizing new UDRP providers</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.5in;tab-stops:11.0pt .5in;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times"><span style="">•<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times">From</span></i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times">: Steve DelBianco
<sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx></span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.5in;tab-stops:11.0pt .5in;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times"><span style="">•<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times">Date</span></i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times">: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 20:58:06 +0000</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:Times"> </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">Business Constituency (BC) Comment on ICANN
Proposal</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">to Recognize New Domain Name Dispute Provider</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"> </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">*Background* </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">There is a pending request for comment regarding
the application of the Arab Center for Domain Name Dispute Resolution (ACDR) to
become a certified</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">Uniform Dispute Resolution Procedure (UDRP)
arbitration provider.</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"><span style=""> </span></span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">*Summary* </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">The Business Constituency (BC) cannot support
approval of this or any other UDRP accreditation application at this time on
the grounds that no new UDRP</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">providers should be accredited until ICANN
implements a standard mechanism for establishing uniform rules and procedures
and flexible means of delineating and enforcing arbitration provider
responsibilities.</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"> </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">*Explanation* </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">The BC notes that the voluntary registration or
renewal of a gTLD domain must be undertaken via an ICANN-accredited registrar.
All registrars are</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">subject to a uniform contractual agreement with
ICANN, the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA). ICANN recently strengthened
the RAA with additional amendments and the addition of flexible enforcement
options, and a Final Report proposing additional RAA amendments has just been
delivered to the GNSO for its consideration.</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"><span style=""> </span></span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">In stark contrast, the involuntary termination or
transfer of a domain can be ordered under the authority of a UDRP provider that
has been accredited</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">by ICANN but which is not bound by any
constraints on or requirements pertaining to the exercise of that delegated
authority.<span style=""> </span>This has led to
increasing concerns about the lack of adequate procedural and substantive
consistency in the UDRP process. Such concerns are likely to grow if additional
providers are accredited in the absence of the uniform framework</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">of a standard mechanism.</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"><span style=""> </span></span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">The BC strongly advocates that ICANN must first
implement a standard mechanism with any and all UDRP arbitration providers that
defines and constrains their authority and powers, and establishes regular and</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">standardized review by ICANN with flexible and
effective means of enforcement. The ultimate sanction of cancelling
accreditation is an extreme sanction that ICANN has demonstrated a reluctance
to initiate in other contexts. </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"><span style=""> </span></span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">ICANN appears to be transitioning from an
environment in which the vast majority of UDRP cases (approximately 98%) were
handled by two arbitration providers (WIPO and NAF) and in which significant
gTLDs were based in a</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">limited number of national jurisdictions to one
in which the majority of gTLDs and UDRP providers may well be headquartered in
a widely distributed group of jurisdictions.</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"> </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">In the future, business interests may well be
investing substantial amounts in these new gTLDs, for both defensive,<span style=""> </span>new branding, and other purposes.</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">In this type of environment it is even more
important that<span style=""> </span>all<span style=""> </span>UDRP providers be subject to uniform
and enforceable responsibilities, as that is</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">the only means of furthering the goal that UDRP
decisions are consistent within and among UDRP providers, and that the UDRP
remains an expedited and</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">lower cost remediation for addressing
cybersquatting.</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"><span style=""> </span></span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">The BC notes that the issue of whether UDRP
providers should be under a standard mechanism with ICANN is almost entirely
separable from the question</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">of whether the UDRP evaluation standards for
determining the existence of cybersquatting should be reformed.<span style=""> </span>There is no need to debate the</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">substantive elements of the UDRP in order to
address the fundamental issue of whether UDRP providers should be under a
standard mechanism.</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"> </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">*** </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"> </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">The rapporteur for these comments was Phil
Corwin.</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier"> </span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier">ICANN Business Constituency</span></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal"><a href="http://www.bizconst.org/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:Courier;color:#0020E3">http://www.bizconst.org</span></a><b style=""><span style="font-family:Times;color:black">Business Constituency
comment on recognizing new UDRP providers</span></b></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal"><i style=""><span style="font-family:Times;color:black"> </span></i></p>
<p class="ecxMsoNormal"> </p>
<br><div><div id="ecxSkyDrivePlaceholder"></div><hr id="ecxstopSpelling">From: marilynscade@hotmail.com<br>To: steve.crocker@icann.org; fadi.chehade@icann.org; john.jeffrey@icann.org<br>CC: excomm@bizconst.org<br>Subject: Communication from Business Constituency regarding position of Constituency on approval of UDRP providers<br>Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:57:57 -0500<br><br>
<style><!--
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr">
<font class="ecxApple-style-span" face="'Times New Roman'"><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style=""><h3 style="font-size:12pt"><br></h3><div style="font-size:12pt">Dear Chairman Crocker and President/CEO Chehade</div><div><font class="ecxApple-style-span" size="3"><br></font></div></span><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style="font-weight:bold"><font class="ecxApple-style-span" size="3">Comment from BC on recognizing new UDRP providers</font></span></font><div><font class="ecxApple-style-span" size="3" face="'Times New Roman'"><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style=""><b><br></b></span><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style=""><div>It has come to our attention that the Board Consent agenda includes consideration of a proposal for a new UDRP provider. </div><div> </div><div>This was a surprise to many, as there had been no intervening communications with the broader community since 2010. There is therefore a lack of information regarding the proposal and how earlier concerns have been addressed by ICANN. </div><div><br></div><div>I am retransmitting the position of the BC regarding recognizing new UDRP providers, which was developed and posted in October 2010, in response to an ICANN proposal to recognize new domain name dispute providers.</div><div><br></div></span><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style="white-space:pre"><div><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style="white-space:pre">As described in the Statement, the BC believes that ICANN should implement a standard mechanism for </span></div></span><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style="white-space:pre"><div><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style="white-space:pre">establishing uniform rules and procedures and flexible means of delineating and enforcing arbitration provider </span></div><div><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style="white-space:pre">responsibilities. </span></div><div><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style="white-space:pre"><br></span></div><div><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style="white-space:pre">Transmitted by the BC Chair, on behalf of the Business Constituency</span></div><div>February 27, 2013</div></span></font><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style=""><pre><br></pre></span>
</div> </div></div></div> </div></div></div> </div></body>
</html>