<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
</head>
<body>
<div dir="ltr">Paul,
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">While I cannot speak to the URS, similar “nuisance” behavior has been observed in a number of UDRP cases such as the following: </div>
<div dir="ltr"><span><br>
</span></div>
<div dir="ltr"><span>www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=D2016-0414</span>
<div><span><br>
</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<span id="draft-break"></span><br>
<br>
Brian<span id="draft-break"></span><br>
<br>
<div>
<div class="null" dir="auto">On 8 January 2018 at 10:58:41 GMT-5, Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup@gmail.com> wrote:<br class="null">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" style="border-left-style:solid;border-width:1px;margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px;" class="null">
<div class="null" dir="auto">
<div class="null">
<div class="null">
<div dir="ltr" class="null">
<div class="null">Has there ever been an instance where someone has made a nuisance of themselves by re-registering and abusing names that they have had suspended under a URS determination?</div>
<br class="null">
<div class="null"><br class="null">
<br class="null">
<br class="null">
</div>
</div>
<div nop="gmail_extra" class="null"><br class="null">
<div nop="gmail_quote" class="null">On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 3:26 PM, claudio di gangi
<span dir="ltr" class="null"><<a href="mailto:ipcdigangi@gmail.com" target="_blank" class="null">ipcdigangi@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br class="null">
<div class="null" ref="32727">
<div id="bx-quote-32727" class="null"><span class="null"></span></div>
</div>
<blockquote nop="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex" class="null">
<div dir="ltr" class="null">George, all,
<div class="null"><br class="null">
</div>
<div class="null">Thanks for this note.<br class="null">
<div class="null"><br class="null">
</div>
<div class="null">Just for clarification on the last point, as I understand the current remedies available under the URS does not include cancellation of the domain.</div>
<div class="null"><br class="null">
</div>
<div class="null">As a result, upon expiry the suspended domain can be renewed and used (including for abusive purposes) by the losing registrant of the URS decision.</div>
<div class="null"><br class="null">
</div>
<div class="null">To address this issue we can consider adding cancellation as a remedy (or otherwise modifying the URS) to minimize the need for repeated, serial enforcement against previously suspended domains.</div>
<div class="null"><br class="null">
</div>
<div class="null">Best regards,<br class="null">
</div>
<div class="null">Claudio</div>
</div>
</div>
<div nop="HOEnZb" class="null">
<div nop="h5" class="null">
<div nop="gmail_extra" class="null"><br class="null">
<div nop="gmail_quote" class="null">On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 8:09 AM, George Kirikos
<span dir="ltr" class="null"><<a href="mailto:icann@leap.com" target="_blank" class="null">icann@leap.com</a>></span> wrote:<br class="null">
<blockquote nop="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex" class="null">
Hi Paul,<br class="null">
<br class="null">
Thanks for your thoughts. I agree that they are different. Just<br class="null">
pointing out that there are other systems out there that don't have<br class="null">
that role reversal feature.<br class="null">
<br class="null">
Also, I believe some folks had mused about the possibility of a single<br class="null">
DRP that integrated the URS and UDRP. The issue of creation of a<br class="null">
"Notice of Dispute", that preceded the actual dispute, also has<br class="null">
arisen. If such a system also handled the high number of defaults<br class="null">
differently than today, then one result might be a much lower cost<br class="null">
procedure in the case of defaults (i.e. it could be very lightweight<br class="null">
like the YouTube procedure), and then reference to the courts for the<br class="null">
disputes when both sides show up and are heavily contesting the<br class="null">
matter.<br class="null">
<br class="null">
In terms of integration, one way to look at the URS is that it's very<br class="null">
similar to a UDRP where the Complainant (TM holder) asks only for<br class="null">
cancellation, albeit that the URS cancellation happens with a delay<br class="null">
(under the UDRP, the cancellation would happen almost immediately,<br class="null">
after allowing for the appeal to the courts)<br class="null">
<br class="null">
Sincerely,<br class="null">
<br class="null">
George Kirikos<br class="null">
<a href="tel:416-588-0269" value="+14165880269" target="_blank" class="null">416-588-0269</a><br class="null">
<a href="http://www.leap.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="null">http://www.leap.com/</a><br class="null">
<br class="null">
On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 6:30 AM, Paul Keating <<a href="mailto:Paul@law.es" target="_blank" class="null">Paul@law.es</a>> wrote:<br class="null">
> George,<br class="null">
><br class="null">
> I know that a response has already been posted but I wanted to add my<br class="null">
> quick thoughts.<br class="null">
><br class="null">
> I agree that the DMCA and the UDRP/URS are not identical. In fact the<br class="null">
> roles remain reversed throughout the UDRP/URS process. The DMCA merely<br class="null">
> provides a notice, take-down followed by the opportunity to revive the<br class="null">
> posting. Once reposting occurs the issue remains as it was before the<br class="null">
> notice - the copyright owner must proceed with litigation. The UDRP/URS<br class="null">
> however, results in the domain being transferred/suspended or not. In the<br class="null">
> case of transfer, it is the registrant that must file. In the case the<br class="null">
> complaint is denied then the trademark owner has that burden (like the<br class="null">
> copyright owner in the DMCA example).<br class="null">
><br class="null">
> PRK<br class="null">
><br class="null">
> On 1/6/18, 12:23 AM, "gnso-rpm-wg on behalf of George Kirikos"<br class="null">
> <<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank" class="null">gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org</a> on behalf of
<a href="mailto:icann@leap.com" target="_blank" class="null">icann@leap.com</a>> wrote:<br class="null">
><br class="null">
>>Hi folks,<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>There was an interesting article published today about a copyright<br class="null">
>>dispute involving "white noise" videos on YouTube:<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>><a href="https://gizmodo.com/man-s-youtube-video-of-white-noise-hit-with-five-copyr" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="null">https://gizmodo.com/man-s-yo<wbr class="null">utube-video-of-white-noise-hit<wbr class="null">-with-five-copyr</a><br class="null">
>>i-1821804093<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>which linked to the dispute procedure that YouTube follows:<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>><a href="https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797454" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="null">https://support.google.com/y<wbr class="null">outube/answer/2797454</a><br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>Going through the various links, it was very interesting that they<br class="null">
>>even have a "Copyright School", see:<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>><a href="https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2814000" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="null">https://support.google.com/y<wbr class="null">outube/answer/2814000</a><br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>(expand the "How to resolve a copyright strike" to see the link to<br class="null">
>>it), which is quite interesting, given how often the education aspect<br class="null">
>>for registrants has come up in our PDP's work.<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>Also of interest is the section on "Counter Notification Basics":<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>><a href="https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807684" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="null">https://support.google.com/y<wbr class="null">outube/answer/2807684</a><br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>where importantly it says:<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>"After we process your counter notification by forwarding it to the<br class="null">
>>claimant, the claimant has 10 business days to provide us with<br class="null">
>>evidence that they have initiated a court action to keep the content<br class="null">
>>down."<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>and it's the content creator who posts the relevant jurisdiction:<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>><a href="https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6005919" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="null">https://support.google.com/y<wbr class="null">outube/answer/6005919</a><br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>""I consent to the jurisdiction of the Federal District Court for the<br class="null">
>>district in which my address is located, or if my address is outside<br class="null">
>>of the United States, the judicial district in which YouTube is<br class="null">
>>located, and will accept service of process from the claimant."<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>As noted in prior threads, various issues arise under the URS (and<br class="null">
>>UDRP) when the natural role of plaintiffs vs. defendants (had the<br class="null">
>>URS/UDRP not existed) gets reversed (e.g. the Yoyo.email UK "cause of<br class="null">
>>action issue", as well as IGO and other groups' claimed "sovereign<br class="null">
>>immunity").<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>With the dispute resolution procedure followed by YouTube, instead the<br class="null">
>>onus is on the copyright owner (the "claimant") to file the lawsuit,<br class="null">
>>in the same natural way that would exist had that dispute resolution<br class="null">
>>procedure not existed. Thus, none of the issues due to reversal of<br class="null">
>>plaintiff/defendant arise.<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>I thought it would be of interest, especially as it also might also<br class="null">
>>give insights as to how "defaults" are handled.<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>Food for thought.<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>Sincerely,<br class="null">
>><br class="null">
>>George Kirikos<br class="null">
>><a href="tel:416-588-0269" value="+14165880269" target="_blank" class="null">416-588-0269</a><br class="null">
>><a href="http://www.leap.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="null">http://www.leap.com/</a><br class="null">
>>____________________________<wbr class="null">___________________<br class="null">
>>gnso-rpm-wg mailing list<br class="null">
>><a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank" class="null">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br class="null">
>><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="null">https://mm.icann.org/mailman<wbr class="null">/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><br class="null">
><br class="null">
><br class="null">
______________________________<wbr class="null">_________________<br class="null">
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list<br class="null">
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank" class="null">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br class="null">
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="null">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l<wbr class="null">istinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><br class="null">
</blockquote>
<span id="bx-quote-end-32727" class="null"></span></div>
<br class="null">
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br class="null">
______________________________<wbr class="null">_________________<br class="null">
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list<br class="null">
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" class="null">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br class="null">
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="null">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<wbr class="null">listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><br class="null">
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="null">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>