[gnso-rpm-wg] Correction to UDRP data on 2-June TM Claims Sub-Team call

George Kirikos icann at leap.com
Fri Jun 9 10:31:39 UTC 2017


Hello,

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Beckham, Brian <brian.beckham at wipo.int> wrote:
> Apologies if I incorrectly in your view added the word percent after the raw numbers.
>
> In any event, I stand by what I said, and prefer not to engage in further discussion.

So, if it's the WIPO position, that you "stand by", that 6%
constitutes "very few", what does that imply about 1200 UDRPs for new
gTLDs (or say 3000, to estimate the total including other providers,
out of 25 million new gTLDs)?

By my math, 3000 out of 25,000,000 or so new gTLD domains is 0.012
percent (i.e. 0.00012 x 100). It seems by your analysis, there's no
real problem of cybersquatting. That would seem to argue for the
elimination of the UDRP/URS and TMCH, given there are "very few"
cases. Indeed, since 0.012 percent is 1/500th of 6%, it might be
called "very, very, very few". Divide it by 4, even, given those cases
are spread over approximately 4 years.

Why are we investing such substantial time and effort, for a so-called
"problem" which affects "very, very, very few" domain names??!!??
Those "very, very, very few" domain names would not cause any
significant burden on the judicial system, spread over 100+ countries,
given there are "very, very, very few" of them to begin with.

Sincerely,

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


More information about the gnso-rpm-wg mailing list