domains Canadian Organization takes on Global Domain Name Disputes

Very interesting! I must learn more about this, which operates out of a city in my province. The flowchart on their site is very helpful in showing how the process works. The idea of trying to resolve issues prior to UDRP seems like a good idea to me. I presume @Rob Monster knows about this since he was at ICANN in Montreal, but since he brought up resolving disputes without UDRP in another thread I am tagging him in case he did not see this. Thanks for bringing it to our attention @Lox .
Bob

Thanks for the link.

Bob Hawkes said:

Very interesting! I must learn more about this, which operates out of a city in my province. The flowchart on their site is very helpful in showing how the process works. The idea of trying to resolve issues prior to UDRP seems like a good idea to me. I presume @Rob Monster knows about this since he was at ICANN in Montreal, but since he brought up resolving disputes without UDRP in another thread I am tagging him in case he did not see this. Thanks for bringing it to our attention @Lox .
Bob

Click to expand...

Thanks Bob. I was actually writing this one last night:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/wh...upper-that-is-held-via-privacy-proxy.1163437/

Posted it this morning.

I was not at ICANN Montreal but @Sufyan Alani was there.

Apparently the private sector is realizing that the existing frameworks for Dispute Resolution are possibly not operating in a registrant-friendly way and that we might need new solutions.

Bob Hawkes said:

The idea of trying to resolve issues prior to UDRP seems like a good idea to me.

Click to expand...

I don't see this a way to resolve disputes "prior" to UDRP. Rather, the CIIDRC is a just another venue/provider to bring UDRP claims/disputes (for almost any extension, now including .CAs). That's how I understand things but please correct me if I'm wrong.

If my understanding is correct, I'm also wondering about the legal implications that might come with the CIIDRC since .CA disputes could previously only be pursued under the CDRP (which had significant differences in policy/law compared to the UDRP). For example, the policy under the CDRP explicitly requires that the complainant has TM rights prior to the registration of the domain name at issue, whereas the UDRP doesn't.

I guess my main question is whether .CA complainants now choose between the UDRP and CDRP, and base that decision on whichever has policy/laws/precedents most favourable to their case?

I'm still slightly confused on how CIIDRC will deal with .CA domain disputes, but I just dug a bit deeper it seems like .CA's are still only subject to the CDRP:
https://ciidrc.org/domain-name-disputes/country-code-top-level-domains-cctlds/

My best guess is that CIIDRC will apply UDRP policy for gTLDS and for those countries who have adopted the UDRP, but will apply CDRP policy for any disputes involving .CAs (or maybe they don't deal with .CA disputes at all)?

esdiel said:

I don't see this a way to resolve disputes "prior" to UDRP. Rather, the CIIDRC is a just another venue/provider to bring UDRP claims/disputes (for almost any extension, now including .CAs). That's how I understand things but please correct me if I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

I have no inside information, but given their expertise in other types of mediation, and the flow chart they show of the domain dispute process, I took it to mean that they would first try to resolve it and if that was not successful then they would initiate a UDRP (or as you say similar, depending on TLD) process on your behalf. You pay the first fee independent of how the process goes, and then if it goes to UDRP that fee. As I say I may understand it, but if they are essentially just legal representatives for UDRP I don't understand how they can claim to only be the second in North America and first in Canada. They do have one lawyer on their staff, but also arbitration and mediation specialists. As I said, I may be wrong as I have not reached out to them yet.
Bob

Thanks. I can't say I've ever gone through the UDRP process or that I'm overly familiar with it but it seems like CIIDRC handles the entire process from start to end (by applying UDRP's rules and policy).

From what I understand, that initial fee/process is just to verify the complainant has a legitimate complaint before it goes any further (to avoid wasting time on frivolous/deficient claims). If the complaint does have merit and meets all the requirements (as per UDRP rules/policy), then the proceedings continue as usual. If it doesn't have merit and/or doesn't meet all the requirements, then the complaint gets thrown out.

Perhaps that initial verification process is something new but i don't see this as an alternative to the UDRP.

esdiel said:

Thanks. I can't say I've ever gone through the UDRP process or that I'm overly familiar with it but it seems like CIIDRC handles the entire process from start to end (by applying UDRP's rules and policy).

From what I understand, that initial fee/process is just to verify the complainant has a legitimate complaint before it goes any further (to avoid wasting time on frivolous/deficient claims). If the complaint does have merit and meets all the requirements (as per UDRP rules/policy), then the proceedings continue as usual. If it doesn't have merit and/or doesn't meet all the requirements, then the complaint gets thrown out.

Perhaps that initial verification process is something new but i don't see this as an alternative to the UDRP.

Click to expand...

The process I would like to see done via WHOQ.com is to largely automate the dispute resolution process by (1) capturing structured data to validate the legitimacy of the complaint, and then (2) verifying the complainant's email and phone via SMS and (3) routing the verified complainant contact details to the registrant notifying them of the nature of the complaint and explaining the resolution options:

(1) submit the auth code of the unlocked domain, in return for a mutually executed online release form

(2) submit a price which the registrant would agree to settle via online purchase agreement which also releases further claims.

(3) hire an arbitrator to attempt to broker a compromise, e.g. fixed fee of $199.

I am not sure if there are other logical options but I am reasonably confident that UDRP is now a giant waste of everyone's time at this point and needs to be replaced by software. They are sending 1 page letters via DHL from Switzerland. Who pays for this nonsense? Ultimately, we all do.

@Ala Dadan @Sufyan Alani