Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The UDRP: Is It Un-Fair.com?

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the selling-to-the-stronger-bidder dept.

typecast writes "A study of more than 3,000 UDRP decisions by a Canadian law prof. suggests that ICANN's domain-dispute resolution process may be even more unfair than Slashdot types already believe. This article says the study confirms organizations such as WIPO and the National Arbitration Forum decide most cases in favor of trademark holders. But it also says it's clear that individual arbitrators with strong "anti-cybersquatting" records are the ones most likely to be handed UDRP cases. A copy of the study and a minimal database of UDRP-panelist stats can be found at Geist's own UDRPInfo Web site."

4 of 119 comments (clear)

  1. Devil's Advocat by baronben · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not to start a flame war here, but since the internet is global, and since laws aren't, some sort of Internatinal orginization with binding arbatration powers is needed to make sure that some one in Brazil or Burni can't get a copywrited name, or some one using the Colombia suffix .CO can't get Cnn.co or Slashdot.co (NEVER!).

    Ben Spigel
    Sic Transit Gloria

    --
    Sleep is for the weak!
  2. Logic bombs away! by mystery_bowler · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The reason trademark holders win the vast majority of these domain name disputes couldn't possibly be because they deserve the name and the current holder has no reason other than cybersquatting to have it...could it?

    I mean, hey, I know the every day average guy has no chance in hell up against a corporation when undergoing fast-track arbitration. And maybe I'm just not clued in to the majority of these cases, but if someone made a statement to me to the effect of "A guy named Joe Toledo bought the domain ford.com and now the car manufacturer wants it, who do you think should have it?" I'd be inclined to side with Ford. Because Ford has a trademark, much like an integral part of their corporate entity. Now, if you told me a guy named "Joe Ford" bought it, I'd say you've got a case. I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of these defendants in domain name disputes don't have a reason other than profiteering to have these domain names and that's why they lose.

    --

    My sigs always suck.
  3. Cybersquatters are scum... by fmaxwell · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Every desirable name (and even most typos) have been gobbled up by a bunch of greedy, talentless parasites who are hoping to strike it rich by cyberextorting from companies. I'm happy to see them lose these battles. Sure, there are probably some cases being decided the wrong way, but the good being done outweighs the bad.


    Sorry if this opinion offends, but when I really resent jerks paying $35/year to register a domain and then extorting $200K out of some company. I'm tired of finding every domain name that I might want in the hands of some cybersquatter who has no intention of ever using or developing it. It reminds me of someone who buys up all of the plywood before a hurricane and sells it for $100/sheet to his desperate neighbors.

  4. Jucius Maximus by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Perhaps this could explain the sex education on homeschool oriented domains? I'm not sure whether it's right to love or hate ICANN for things like this...