[cctlds-comments] WIPO ccTLD Best Practices
|Subject:||[cctlds-comments] WIPO ccTLD Best Practices|
|From:||"United Kingdom Patent Office in consultation with the Department of Trade and Industry" < firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:39:20 +0200|
Name: Jeff Watson Organization: The Patent Office Position: Senior Policy Advisor
Appropriate and up-to-date contact details (WHOIS) need to be available to intellectual property owners or their agents so that they can protect their rights against infringement. However we recognise that ccTLD registries may need to amend their terms and conditions to meet this requirement, and they will also need to take account of local privacy laws in making such information available.
We recognise the importance of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and in particular how effectively it has been applied to deal with domain name disputes under the UDRP. We agree with the principle that any ccTLD dispute resolution model should meet certain minimum requirements based on those adopted for the UDRP. This approach should both ensure that ccTLDs meet international norms when dealing with disputes and have the flexibility to allow for any local requirements.
We note that under the UDRP there has been considerable debate regarding the number and choice of panelists to deal with disputes. We believe it is important that the UDRP and equivalent procedures are both objective and seen to be objective, and question of panelists is critical to this perception. Whilst restricting the panel to one member should minimise the cost and maximise the efficiency of the procedure, it can call into question the objectivity of procedure. Perhaps the "strike-out" approach is worth considering where the parties are provided with a list of panelists (three or five) and each party is allowed to "strike-out" (one or two names) from this list before the single panelist is selected. This approach could improve the perceived objectivity of the procedure and perhaps would not add significantly to the administrative burden.
Submitted on behalf of the UK Patent Office in consultation with the Department of Trade and Industry.
Back to Browse Comments for WIPO ccTLD Best Practices