[process2-comments] RFC-1

 Name: Paul Cotton Organization: Joinin.com Position: Director My main point is why bother to look at extending the framework for disputes when your own arbitration panels routinely ignore and extend what is already there to arrive at their, seemingly, predetermined decision. An example of this is the recent barcelona.com decision, which contained the following: "However, such right of interest is and will be always subject to the lack of disputes with parties having better rights or more legitimate interests as in this case." Now, unless I am mistaken section 4aii does not cover the issues of "better" or "more" - and the only reason for interpreting as such would be to allow the udrp to prove this section so that the transfer can be requested. If section 4aii were to be interpreted correctly, then the transfer could not have been the outcome. For reference, here is section 4aii of the UDRP: (ii) you have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name No mention of "more" or "better". Also, these new areas seem fine in their written format in this site, but again I feel your own arbitration panels will show further ineptitude that leads to more unwarranted cases being brought, more money coming in to your organization for over zealous corporate bullies and more artificial confusion in the domain marketplace. Oh and lets not forget a complete lack of accountability too.