[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Attempt at Achieving Full Consensus -- Option #4

[George Kirikos]

Hi Petter,

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Petter Rindforth
<petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu> wrote:
> So, if the case is taken to a court (within those 10  - working - days), and
> the case is dismissed, the only thing the complainant has to do is to show
> such decision to the Registrar:

As I've noted separately, that might not be enough, especially because
there might be parallel litigation relating to the domain name itself
(in rem, or other creative options). The ICANN policy only
contemplates **one possible scenario** as to the litigation that might
be taken against a domain name in dispute during/after a UDRP. If that
was the *only* litigation surrounding the fate of that domain name,
then that might be the end of the story. But, it need not be. Whenever
there is active litigation, registrars will tend to put a litigation
hold on the domain pending the resolution of ALL active cases. If that
parallel litigation survives, the registrar would hold the status quo
until all active court processes are exhausted.

I think folks are not thinking outside the box here, they've been
perhaps mesmerized by re-reading the UDRP policy too often and
thinking that it's the alpha and omega of the relevant law. It's not.
There's a whole world of real law that exists outside the UDRP. Just
because ICANN delineates one possible course of litigation with
respect to challenging the outcome of a UDRP doesn't mean that a
registrant is bound to use *only* that mechanism. ICANN has no say
over any other legal mechanism(s) a registrant uses to assert their
ownership claim before a relevant national court. Just like ICANN has
no say over any legal mechanism(s) a non-registrant uses to dispute a
domain name without resorting to use of the UDRP.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/