[ALAC] Fwd: [council] NCUC statement on the URS

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Sun Jun 19 04:16:40 UTC 2011


The following is a statement just issued by the NCUC which I 
personally support and that the ALAC might consider supporting as well.

Alan


>From: "Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu" <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu>
>To: "council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>, "karen.lentz at icann.org"
>         <karen.lentz at icann.org>, Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz at icann.org>,
>         "Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au" 
> <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>, Rita
>  Rodin Johnston <Rita.Rodin at skadden.com>
>CC: Konstantinos Komaitis <k.komaitis at strath.ac.uk>
>Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 23:57:41 -0400
>Subject: [council] NCUC statement on the URS
>
>
>The following is a formal statement from the Non-Commercial Users 
>Constituency (NCUC) on the Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) system. We 
>would greatly appreciate it if ICANN staff or the GNSO 
>representatives on the Board could ensure that it is forwarded to 
>the rest of the Board as soon as possible. Thank you.
>
>"The NCUC strongly urges the ICANN Board to retain the current 
>proposed standard of proof in relation to the URS. Not only is the 
>standard consistent with the recommendations made by the IRT and 
>STI, which represents community consensus on this particular point, 
>lowering the standard to that being requested by the GAC would 
>completely undermine the purpose of the URS, which is to expedite 
>suspension of domains in "slam dunk" cases without abrogating the 
>rights of applicants to due process. Allowing an expedited 
>suspension on the basis merely of a "preponderance of the evidence" 
>would go against this fundamental principle, and disrupt 
>registrants' reliance on domain stability. Changing the evidentiary 
>standard would also potentially expand the URS, undoing the 
>safeguards that were negotiated and published in the Guidebook and 
>raising the very real possibility of abuse of the URS. The URS is 
>not intended to replace the UDRP, and as such one of the critical 
>differences between the two - as to the standard of proof - must be retained."
>
>Best regards,
>Mary
>
>
>Mary W S Wong
>Professor of Law
>Chair, Graduate IP Programs
>Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
>UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two White Street Concord, 
>NH 03301 USA Email: 
><mailto:mary.wong at law.unh.edu>mary.wong at law.unh.edu Phone: 
>1-603-513-5143 Webpage: 
><http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php>http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php 
>Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network 
>(SSRN) at: <http://ssrn.com/author=437584>http://ssrn.com/author=437584


More information about the ALAC mailing list