I have been mis-interpreting the UDRP - I have been reading it as if ICANN
is a party to it. They are not - it is between the registrar and the
registrant. So there is no ICANN "order" to transfer a domain name, and
after an administrative action the registrar acts in accordance with the
dispute resolution provider's decision, unless the respondent notifies the
registrar of impending court action. Paragraph 3b allows the registrar to
transfer a domain name on "receipt of an order from a court or arbitral
tribunal, in each case of competent jurisdiction, requiring such action."
So if a third party can convince a court in either jurisdiction (the
registrar's or the registrant's) to order the registrar to transfer a domain
name, the registrar does so, regardless of whether or not a trial has
occurred. ICANN is not involved in the process. The ten day period a
respondent has to begin a court action is no guarantee of being able to use
the domain name until the court action is completed. A complainant can
force a respondent to go to court in the jurisdiction of the registrar. The
address of your registrar can be important to you if your domain name
registration is ever disputed.
Enough bad news for one day?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Hatcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 3:02 PM
Subject: Re: UDRP Clarification [WAS: RE: Re: Domain Disputes...]
> The status shown on ICANN's website is the decision of the administrative
> panel, and "subject to challenge by court action".
>
> In a case where a panel awards a domain name to a complainant, if the
> respondent (registrant) files a court action (and provides evidence to
ICANN
> that they have done so) within ten days, ICANN is supposed to delay the
> transfer of the domain name until the court action is completed or
dropped.
> This is really the only defense a domain owner has if a dispute resolution
> provider's decision is contrary to policy and law (and there are,
> unfortunately, many cases of this in ICANN's short history). If a
> complainant is able to circumvent this stated policy by going after a
> registrar directly, all domain name owners are in real danger.
>
> At least one appeals court has declined to enforce a "descriptive,
> non-distinctive trademark":
>
>
www.law.com/cgi-bin/gx.cgi/AppLogic+FTContentServer?pagename=law/View&c=Arti
> cle&cid=ZZZ8DHT93KC&live=true&cst=1&pc=0&pa=0
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 2:00 PM
> Subject: RE: UDRP Clarification [WAS: RE: Re: Domain Disputes...]
>
>
> >
> > > If ICANN ordered it please post the letter from them saying so...this
> would
> > > clarify alot and may even shut me up.
> >
> > You might want to check ICANN's website. They do show the status of the
> > dispute as "name transferred".
> >
