[gnso-rpm-wg] [Ext] Re: REMINDER re: Nominations for RPM Working Group Co-Chair

[claudio di gangi]

 George, all,

Personally, I don't believe WIPO is doing anything wrong by not publishing
your specific list of post-UDRP cases, which is not a requirement for
Providers. From my perspective, it looks like they have posted some of
these cases as a nice gesture to the community.

The webpage on which these cases are published clearly states these are
"select" cases and there is no intent to create a comprehensive, updated
running list of all post-UDPR actions.

Moreover, in taking a quick glance at some of the cases you highlighted:

<Soundstop.com> - the court case settled; it doesn't appear the court
issued a holding that is generally applicable to other UDRP proceedings.

<sdt.com> - it looks like the UDRP panel terminated the proceeding to let
the court case run its course.

<Moobitalk.com> -   the decision of the appeals court was based on a legal
principle (territoriality) that is not a required element under the UDRP.
This seems to be a relatively unique case and publishing this decision may
confuse some readers in terms of the general applicability of UDRP
jurisprudence.

---

In terms of Brian's nomination, I am very grateful that he is willing to
serve and dedicate the time needed to take on this role.  As mentioned by
Zak and other's, I believe he is preeminently qualified and has the natural
leadership skills that will greatly benefit our team.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,
Claudio



On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 12:47 PM, George Kirikos <icann at leap.com> wrote:

> With regards to Brian Beckham of WIPO being one of the co-chairs, I'm
> relatively indifferent, as long as the co-chairs comply with the
> working group guidelines which place constraints on their behaviour
> (i.e. neutrality, not pushing their own agenda, etc.). It's meant to
> be an administrative/clerical task, essentially.
>
> I think Brian would go a long way towards demonstrating his commitment
> towards that required neutrality if he would get WIPO to update their
> "Court Challenged Cases" page at:
>
> http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/challenged/
>
> with cases that have been **repeatedly** brought to their attention in
> the past, including:
>
> 1. Soundstop.com --
> http://domainnamewire.com/2016/07/21/mike-mann-
> overturns-udrp-decision-court/
> https://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/soundstop-1.pdf
>
> 2. AustinPain.com --
> http://ia601008.us.archive.org/18/items/gov.uscourts.cod.
> 147273/gov.uscourts.cod.147273.23.0.pdf
>
> 3. SDT.com --
> http://domainnamewire.com/2015/07/22/50000-penalty-for-
> filing-a-frivolous-udrp/
> https://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/SDT-settlement1.pdf
>
> 4. Moobitalk.com --
> http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5899d5f9-3bbc-416e-a9a5-
> 7233a147b62c
> https://www.legalis.net/jurisprudences/cour-dappel-de-
> paris-pole-5-ch-1-arret-du-8-novembre-2016/
> (actual decision)
>
> It looks bad on WIPO's part that all of these successful challenges
> are not being reflected on that page. WIPO is quick to assert "record
> cybersquatting" exists, yet they fail to mention the other side of the
> coin, abuse of the process, reverse domain name hijacking, and the
> court cases that are required to achieve justice. If Brian would get
> that page updated before an election, that would be wonderful.
>
> 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/20180424/d72e3529/attachment.html>