Fair Domain-Dispute Arbitration Firm Quits the Business

fwc writes: "According to this Newsbytes story, EResolution has decided to quit the Domain Name Dispute-Resolution business because its reputation for being fair has driven away its potential customers - the trademark holders who are filing the complaints. Apparently (and understandably) the trademark holders prefer to use those arbitrators who find for the trademark holder most of the time. Perhaps it is time for ICANN to rethink their policy."

Comments

i c a n n . B l o g

[webword]

While we are on the topic of ICANN...

Here is the ICANN weblog.

...it is about 1 year old.

The .es Domain

[YearOfTheDragon]

The Spanish(.es) solution to domain names isn't very good.

"Only the following regular domain names will be assigned:
a) The full organisation name as it appears in its deed or constitution document.
b) An acronym of the full name of the organisation qualified ...
c) One or more trade names or legally registered trademarks as they appear in the register of the Spanish Office ..."
Complete text can be found here.

There aren't discusion about domains.
But there isn't any freedom.
If I want to register the domain "YearOfTheDragon.ES" I need to get the Trademark.
Do it Happens in other countries?

The first paragraph says it all.

[A_Non_Moose]

A Canadian firm specializing in arbitration won't be settling any more cybersquatting disputes, saying Friday that its reputation for being fair has driven away the trademark holders who file complaints and thus decide who makes money in that business.

First off they are Canadians, which is rife with humor all by itself, but I'll say this is good because most of our brothers to the north are very level-headed.
Good thing to have in an arbitrator.

Reputation for being fair: Kiss of death for a business, and, once again a "Good thing (tm)" when dealing with an arbitrator.

Being fair "drives away trademark holders"...does this say anything about the current situation?
I'm sure copyright holders (RIMPAss's--RIAA/MPAA Ass.--a la the Register) can buy...uh, select the most corrup^H^H^H^H^H easily persuaded judges.

Maybe I'm too damn tired, and too damn cynical, but this suprises anyone?

Uh-huh. Ethics in business has about as much of a chance as chastity in a whorehouse.

IMO, that is.

.

Needs to be more like Mad Max

[Cesaro]

This all needs to be more like MadMax in my opinion. Forget courts and "litigation". If I want to take your domain, trademark or not, we fight to the death and winner takes the domain. If we both lose then it is up for grabs, just like my gold teeth.

Seriously though, one of the largest problems with litigations surrounding these technological items is that the people in power DO NOT UNDERSTAND TECHNOLOGY. This has been proven time and time again by the US patent office (not that other countries are immune), and time after time. The judge telling Kazaa that it must stop people from transferring files. Does the judge not understand a word in the phrase "Peer to peer"? Now I'm not saying that in this case ICANN is technologically illiterate, they're just a corporate whore who refuses to stand up for the little man. I just wanted to rant on the other subject. ;)

=Cesaro

Re:Needs to be more like Mad Max

[Svartalf]

"The patent office doesn't have to understand the technology. Look, its like this. If they have a question to grant or deny a patent - they typically grant. There policy recently with high-tech concepts/ideas is grant the patent, and let the courts handle the mess."

It is part of the requirements of their job to understand something about the technology. If they don't, how are they supposed to grant a Patent on it- rubber stamp it? And don't rely on the courts to sort it out- it's not really their job to understand the technology either so they won't know that someone in the USPTO rubber stamped something.

Somewhere along the time of when the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (ORBA) of 1990 is when things started really going downhill. It was at that point in time that the USPTO started operating more along the lines of a private business (mandated by ORBA) instead of an agency. With them being understaffed for the job, combined with them deriving a good portion of thier budget from Patent grants, etc. it's a recipe for disaster.

How do you become an arbitrator?

[uucp]

I'm not sure that I understand all of this. If the person filing the complaint can choose an arbitrator, then why isn't Slashdot an arbitrator? Or Stallman? Or Lessig? Or an Anonymous Coward?

Hmmmmm.
4.f. Selection of Provider The complainant shall select the Provider from among those approved by ICANN by submitting the complaint to that Provider.

OK. How do you become an approved provider? Well, the Approved Providers list is here. It says: "Additional providers may be approved soon. The above approvals are in effect until further notice at this web page" Nothing on how to become one.

Anybody have any ideas? I'd like to become a "Provider".

I'd agree with this....

[Anonymous Coward]

If it worked both ways. If I owned, say microsoft.org, it would get taken from me even though MS is clearly not a non-profit. The fact is, the original definitions of what TLDs meant is lost in the current system.

See the dispute over WWF.com. The World Wildlife Fund sues the World Wrestling Federation for the domain wwf.com. Now, since the World Wildlife Fund is a non-profit, and already owns wwf.org, and the World Wrestling Federation is clearly for-profit, where's the dispute? Under RFC 1591 each party has the correct domain.

Of course, the WWF (wrestling) has abused the UDRP themselves in the past, but the my point is that actually following the traditional definition of the TLDs is not something the arbitrars care about at all.