[gnso-rpm-wg] Availability of Court for Domain Name owners challenging a URS decision -- false assumption?

[socata]

Dear George,


First of all, this rule is come into force in Nov 1, 2017, and the prior China Domain Name Governance Rule has been terminated according to the article 58 in the new rule.
According to the prior China Domain Name Governance Rule, which come into force in 2004, its article 38 do say that if decision made by court is different with the domain name resolution organization, the court's decision should be applied. However, this part is deleted in the New rule.
You may refer link hereinafter for the old rule: http://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2005/content_64290.htm
China Domain Name Governance Rule is applied for all TLDs, if you read the full text, you will find the rules provide some significant restrictions for the registries and registrars.
The Google translation for article 43(3) is definitely incorrect. The correct translation should be: if there is a decision made by domain name resolution organization or court, registrar should cancel the domain name registration. This article also support the understanding that the decision made by domain name resolution organization have equal effect with the court in China.


However, for the case of canary, I do admit that the domain name is still owned by Lin Zanfu, and I am really curious about the situation. According to my search, I don't find any appealed suit about domain name dispute in China about this case. I will keep an eye on this case.


If you guys have any useful information for this two case, please feel free to tell me, I am sincerely interested to figure out what happens. 


--
Zhou Heng
Ph.d Candidate
Renmin University of China




At 2017-11-23 23:30:11, George Kirikos <icann at leap.com> wrote:
>Hello,
>
>On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:13 AM, socata <socata at ruc.edu.cn> wrote:
>> I would like to provide some my information for this issue in China
>> jurisdiction.
>>
>> According to China Domain Name Governance Rule, the decision made by Domain
>> Name Dispute  Resolution Panel decision is final decision in China.
>> You may see  article 42 in  China Domain Name Governance Rule for detail
>> information.
>>
>> Link for China Domain Name Governance Rule:
>> http://www.miit.gov.cn/n1146295/n1146557/n1146624/c5778555/content.html
>
>Thanks for your message. Is that for the .cn ccTLD? Or does that apply
>rule to gTLDs like .com? (the Google Translation is a bit confusing to
>me)
>
>I know that the Canary.com UDRP decision against a Chinese registrant
>from 4 years ago wasn't final, as the domain name is still owned by
>that registrant (I believe they appealed in court):
>
>https://www.thedomains.com/2013/10/24/disturbing-12-year-old-canary-com-lost-in-udrp/
>http://www.adrforum.com/domaindecisions/1515762.htm
>
>I believe the same thing happened for Razer.com in early 2016:
>
>https://www.namepros.com/blog/razer-upgrades-from-razerzone-com-to-razer-com-legal-battle-revealed.1050304/
>
>albeit in Hong Kong. Of concern, the original UDRP decision does not
>appear on the ADNDRC website.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>George Kirikos
>416-588-0269
>http://www.leap.com/
>_______________________________________________
>gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20171124/2786d0c8/attachment.html>