Question: How do you propose to reduce the number of frivoulous UDRP-complaints? Example: dw.com, which DeutscheWelle now is after (see: www.ousted.net). These cases involve costs for respondents, which complainant does not have to reimburse, even if reverse-hijacking is ruled. Is this fair? Can this go on?

Nominee Replies

Jeanette Hofmann - posted on 2000-09-26 18:44:42 The UDRP is biased towards trademark holders. Neither does it protect free speech, nor any other legitimate rights to names. Thus, UDRP decisions should be at least put under review. However, there are good reasons to question ICANN's authority to adopt UDRP in the first place. Depending on the board's composition after the election, there might be a chance to revoke the whole thing. Alf Hansen - posted on 2000-09-26 04:02:12 The UDRP is a two-egged sword. It is a more effective way to solve conflicts than using the courts, but it is also lowering the threshold for complainants to initiate a dispute process. IMHO, both the complainants and the respondents should have a free choice to use UDRP or not. If one of them refuses, the court is the fallback. In practice this is not the case today.